Search Results

Search found 9235 results on 370 pages for 'social networking'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 166/370 | < Previous Page | 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173  | Next Page >

  • Capabilities of business and SOHO routers

    - by Q8Y
    I'm currently studying for the CCNA certifications (especially for Cisco routers and configuration). I know that business routers provide more features than SOHO routers, the processing speed and RAM can be enough. Assume I need to connect a number of users through a network (accessing internet, share files, printers, ...). I have a high speed connection to the internet and I already applied QoS. How can I find out how many users such a single (SOHO) router could handle? In my case I'd attach to it multiple switches until I have the number of ports needed. Would everything work well and smoothly with 50 users? What about 300? At which point would I need a business router instead? If I implemented VLAN here, would it make any difference in the performance? When do I really need to use more than one router? (Both SOHO and business) I'm thinking that I may need them only if I want to increase the performance (instead of replacing the existing one) and if I have multiple locations, so in this situation I need to have multiple routers, right? Put differently: Is there is a need to have another router if my business all in one place?

    Read the article

  • TCP stops sending weirdly.

    - by Utoah
    In case to find out the cause of TCP retransmits on my Linux (RHEL, kernel 2.6.18) servers connecting to the same switch. I had a client-server pair send "Hello" to each other every 200us and captured the packets with tcpdump on the client machine. The command I used to mimic client and server are: while [ 0 ]; do echo "Hello"; usleep 200; done | nc server 18510 while [ 0 ]; do echo "Hello"; usleep 200; done | nc -l 18510 When the server machine was busy serving some other requests, the client suffered from abrupt retransmits occasionally. But the output of tcpdump seemed irrational. 16:04:58.898970 IP server.18510 > client.34533: P 4531:4537(6) ack 3204 win 123 <nop,nop,timestamp 1923778643 3452833828> 16:04:58.901797 IP client.34533 > server.18510: P 3204:3210(6) ack 4537 win 33 <nop,nop,timestamp 3452833831 1923778643> 16:04:58.901855 IP server.18510 > client.34533: P 4537:4549(12) ack 3210 win 123 <nop,nop,timestamp 1923778646 3452833831> 16:04:58.903871 IP client.34533 > server.18510: P 3210:3216(6) ack 4549 win 33 <nop,nop,timestamp 3452833833 1923778646> 16:04:58.903950 IP server.18510 > client.34533: P 4549:4555(6) ack 3216 win 123 <nop,nop,timestamp 1923778648 3452833833> 16:04:58.905796 IP client.34533 > server.18510: P 3216:3222(6) ack 4555 win 33 <nop,nop,timestamp 3452833835 1923778648> 16:04:58.905860 IP server.18510 > client.34533: P 4555:4561(6) ack 3222 win 123 <nop,nop,timestamp 1923778650 3452833835> 16:04:58.908903 IP client.34533 > server.18510: P 3222:3228(6) ack 4561 win 33 <nop,nop,timestamp 3452833838 1923778650> 16:04:58.908966 IP server.18510 > client.34533: P 4561:4567(6) ack 3228 win 123 <nop,nop,timestamp 1923778653 3452833838> 16:04:58.911855 IP client.34533 > server.18510: P 3228:3234(6) ack 4567 win 33 <nop,nop,timestamp 3452833841 1923778653> 16:04:59.112573 IP client.34533 > server.18510: P 3228:3234(6) ack 4567 win 33 <nop,nop,timestamp 3452834042 1923778653> 16:04:59.112648 IP server.18510 > client.34533: P 4567:5161(594) ack 3234 win 123 <nop,nop,timestamp 1923778857 3452834042> 16:04:59.112659 IP client.34533 > server.18510: P 3234:3672(438) ack 5161 win 35 <nop,nop,timestamp 3452834042 1923778857> 16:04:59.114427 IP server.18510 > client.34533: P 5161:5167(6) ack 3672 win 126 <nop,nop,timestamp 1923778858 3452834042> 16:04:59.114439 IP client.34533 > server.18510: P 3672:3678(6) ack 5167 win 35 <nop,nop,timestamp 3452834044 1923778858> 16:04:59.116435 IP server.18510 > client.34533: P 5167:5173(6) ack 3678 win 126 <nop,nop,timestamp 1923778860 3452834044> 16:04:59.116444 IP client.34533 > server.18510: P 3678:3684(6) ack 5173 win 35 <nop,nop,timestamp 3452834046 1923778860> Packet 3228:3234(6) from client was retransmitted due to ack timeout. What I could not understand was that the client machine did not send out any packets after the first 3228:3234(6) packets was sent. The server machine had advertised a window (scaled) large enough. The data transfer up to the retransmit was fine which meant no slow start should be in action. What can cause the client machine to stop sending until the packet timed out? BTW, I am unable to run tcpdump on the server machine.

    Read the article

  • Prevalence of WMI enabled in real Windows Server networks

    - by TripleAntigen
    Hi I would like to get opinions from systems administrators, on how common it is that WMI functionality is actually enabled in corporate networks. I am writing an enterprise network application that could benefit from the features of WMI, but I noted after creating a virtual network based on Server 2008 R2, that WMI seems to be disabled by default. Do systems admins in practical corporate networks enable WMI? Or is it usually disabled for security purposes? What is it used for if it is enabled? Thanks for any advice! MORE INFO: I should have said, I really need to be able to query the workstations but I understand that by default the WMI ports on Win7 and XP firewalls (at least) are disallowed, so do you use some sort of group policy or other method to leave a hole open for WMI on the workstations? Or is just the servers that are of interest? Thanks for the responses!!

    Read the article

  • How can the route between two private IPs go via public IPs?

    - by Gilles
    I'm trying to understand what this output from traceroute means. I changed the IP addresses for privacy but retained the public/private IP range distinction. traceroute.db -e -n 10.1.1.9 traceroute to (10.1.1.9), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 10.0.0.1 0.596 ms 0.588 ms 0.577 ms 2 10.0.0.2 1.032 ms 1.029 ms 1.084 ms 3 10.0.0.3 3.360 ms 3.355 ms 3.338 ms 4 23.0.0.4 3.974 ms 4.592 ms 4.584 ms 5 23.0.0.5 13.442 ms 13.445 ms 13.434 ms 6 45.0.0.6 13.195 ms 12.924 ms 12.913 ms 7 67.0.0.7 52.088 ms 51.683 ms 52.040 ms 8 10.1.1.8 46.878 ms 44.575 ms 44.815 ms 9 10.1.1.9 45.932 ms 45.603 ms 45.593 ms The first 10.0.* range is inside my organisation. The last 10.1.* range is another site of my organisation. The intermediate addresses belong to various ISPs. I expect that there is some kind of VPN between the two sites, but I don't know much about our network topology. What I don't understand is how the route can go from a private address through public addresses back into private addresses. Searching led me to Public IPs on MPLS Traceroute, which gives a possible explanation: MPLS. Is MPLS the only possible or most likely explanation? Otherwise what does this tell me about our network infrastructure? Bonus question for my edification: in this scenario, who is generating the ICMP TTL exceeded packets and if relevant mangling their source and destination addresses?

    Read the article

  • Find slow network nodes between two data centers

    - by 2called-chaos
    I've got a problem with syncing big amount of data between two data centers. Both machines have got a gigabit connection and are not fully occupied but the fastest that I am able to get is something between 6 and 10 Mbit = not acceptable! Yesterday I made some traceroute which indicates huge load on a LEVEL3 router but the problem exists for weeks now and the high response time is gone (20ms instead of 300ms). How can I trace this to find the actual slow node? Thought about a traceroute with bigger packages but will this work? In addition this problem might not be related to one of our servers as there are much higher transmission rates to other servers or clients. Actually office = server is faster than server <= server! Any idea is appreciated ;) Update We actually use rsync over ssh to copy the files. As encryption tends to have more bottlenecks I tried a HTTP request but unfortunately it is just as slow. We have a SLA with one of the data centers. They said they already tried to change the routing because they say this is related to a cheap network where the traffic gets routed through. It is true that it will route through a "cheapnet" but only the other way around. Our direction goes through LEVEL3 and the other way goes through lambdanet (which they said is not a good network). If I got it right (I'm a network intermediate) they simulated a longer path to force routing through LEVEL3 and they announce LEVEL3 in the AS path. I basically want to know if they're right or they're just trying to abdicate their responsibility. The thing is that the problem exists in both directions (while different routes), so I think it is in the responsibility of our hoster. And honestly, I don't believe that there is a DC2DC connection which only can handle 600kb/s - 1,5 MB/s for weeks! The question is how to detect WHERE this bottleneck is

    Read the article

  • How secure is a subnet?

    - by HorusKol
    I have an unfortunate complication in my network - some users/computers are attached to a completely private and firewalled office network that we administer (10.n.n.x/24 intranet), but others are attached to a subnet provided by a third party (129.n.n.x/25) as they need to access the internet via the third party's proxy. I have previously set up a gateway/router to allow the 10.n.n.x/24 network internet access: # Allow established connections, and those !not! coming from the public interface # eth0 = public interface # eth1 = private interface iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -m state --state NEW ! -i eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allow outgoing connections from the private interface iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT # Masquerade (NAT) iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE # Don't forward any other traffic from the public to the private iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -j REJECT However, I now need to enable access to users on our 129.n.n.x/25 subnet to some private servers on the 10.n.n.x/24 network. I figured that I could do something like: # Allow established connections, and those !not! coming from the public interface # eth0 = public interface # eth1 = private interface #1 (10.n.n.x/24) # eth2 = private interface #2 (129.n.n.x/25) iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -m state --state NEW ! -i eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth2 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allow outgoing connections from the private interfaces iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth2 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT # Allow the two public connections to talk to each other iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth2 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth2 -o eth1 -j ACCEPT # Masquerade (NAT) iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE # Don't forward any other traffic from the public to the private iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -j REJECT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth2 -j REJECT My concern is that I know that the computers on our 129.n.n.x/25 subnet can be accessed via a VPN through the larger network operated by the provider - therefore, would it be possible for someone on the provider's supernet (correct term? inverse of subnet?) to be able to access our private 10.n.n.x/24 intranet?

    Read the article

  • Wake-on-lan only works so many times

    - by Chance
    I have Wake-on-lan configured on my Windows XP machine so that the computer will wake up from Standby. Waking the computer from Standby via network traffic seems to work a certain number of times, say 4 or 5, then it stops working. If I restart the computer it seems to reset this behavior so that I can use WOL a few more times before it starts working. I use the command "wol" on my other, Linux machine with the appropriate IP address and MAC address of the card. I looked at the network card to see if it had different lights when WOL worked and when it didn't. When it has a solid amber light where the ethernet cable connects, WOL seems to work. When it has a flashing amber light, WOL does not. It seems that the system seems to almost "shut off" the card when it falls to sleep, but I don't know if this is a function of time or number of standby/wakeups. I have a 3Com 3c920 network card. If I look at the properties in Device Manager, I have "Allow this Device to bring the Computer out of Standby" checked. In the Advanced tab I have anything related to RWU (Remote Wake Up) enabled. I also believe I have the appropriate settings in BIOS related to Remote Wake-Up and I have tried both S1 and S3 power configurations in the BIOS. Intuitively, I would think I would uncheck "Allow the Computer to turn off this device to save power", but doing so disables the "Allow this Device to bring the Computer out of Standby" option. Does anyone know what is happening here or if there is a way to fix it? I have an integrated network card; would getting one that goes into a slot be better? I am running Windows XP on a Dell Optiplex GX240 with a 3Com 3c920 network card.

    Read the article

  • Wired to wireless bridge in Linux

    - by adrianmcmenamin
    I am attempting to set up my Raspberry Pi as a bridge (but I think this is not a question specific to the hardware) - using Debian wheezy. I have a hostapd.conf: (some details changed for security)... interface=wlan0 bridge=br0 driver=nl80211 auth_algs=1 macaddr_acl=0 ignore_broadcast_ssid=0 logger_syslog=-1 logger_syslog_level=0 hw_mode=g ssid=MY_SSID channel=11 wep_default_key=0 wep_key0=MY_KEY wpa=0 (yes, I know WEP is no good) And this in /etc/network/interfaces auto lo iface lo inet loopback iface eth0 inet dhcp allow-hotplug wlan0 iface wlan0 inet manual wpa-roam /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf iface default inet dhcp auto br0 iface br0 inet dhcp bridge-ports eth0 wlan0 Everything seems to come up ok, but I cannot associate with the bridged wireless connection - even though the flashing lights on the USB stick suggest packets are being exchanged. I have read somewhere that not all cards/devices will run in hostap mode - they won't pass packets in one direction: is that right? (The info was a bit old)- this my card: [ 3.663245] usb 1-1.3.1: new high-speed USB device number 5 using dwc_otg [ 3.794187] usb 1-1.3.1: New USB device found, idVendor=0cf3, idProduct=9271 [ 3.804321] usb 1-1.3.1: New USB device strings: Mfr=16, Product=32, SerialNumber=48 [ 3.816994] usb 1-1.3.1: Product: USB2.0 WLAN [ 3.823790] usb 1-1.3.1: Manufacturer: ATHEROS [ 3.830645] usb 1-1.3.1: SerialNumber: 12345 So, what have I got wrong here?

    Read the article

  • netkit: why cant my router 4 pc4 ping my router 1 pc1 - how can I solve this please?

    - by donok
    Below I have four routers connected but my pc1 on r1 cannot ping my pc4 on r4 and also my pc2 on r2 cant ping my pc4 on r4 and vice versa. Below is a network diagram: and the configurations are below that, could anyone help me please on making them accessible? ![connecting 4 routers][1] I cant post my diagram on serverfault(less than 10 rep) so I did on stackoverflow and asked the same question. pc1: ifconfig eth0 195.11.14.5 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 195.11.14.255 up route add default gw 195.11.14.1 dev eth0 pc2.start: ifconfig eth0 200.1.1.7 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 200.1.1.255 up route add default gw 200.1.1.1 dev eth0 pc3: ifconfig eth0 195.20.14.9 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 195.20.1.255 up route add default gw 195.20.14.1 dev eth0 pc4: ifconfig eth0 200.2.1.11 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 200.2.1.255 up route add default gw 200.2.1.1 dev eth0 r1: ifconfig eth0 195.11.14.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 195.11.14.255 up ifconfig eth1 100.0.0.9 netmask 255.255.255.252 broadcast 100.0.0.11 up route add -net 200.1.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 100.0.0.10 dev eth1 route add default gw 100.0.0.10 lab.conf: if you need more on that Ill post it up but I think most of the info is there. Any help would be greatly appreciated especially trying to make a connection between pc4 and pc1, even if you think it does not make sense please explain why. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Keepalived for more than 20 virtual addresses

    - by cvaldemar
    I have set up keepalived on two Debian machines for high availability, but I've run into the maximum number of virtual IP's I can assign to my vrrp_instance. How would I go about configuring and failing over 20+ virtual IP's? This is the, very simple, setup: LB01: 10.200.85.1 LB02: 10.200.85.2 Virtual IPs: 10.200.85.100 - 10.200.85.200 Each machine is also running Apache (later Nginx) binding on the virtual IPs for SSL client certificate termination and proxying to backend webservers. The reason I need so many VIP's is the inability to use VirtualHost on HTTPS. This is my keepalived.conf: vrrp_script chk_apache2 { script "killall -0 apache2" interval 2 weight 2 } vrrp_instance VI_1 { interface eth0 state MASTER virtual_router_id 51 priority 101 virtual_ipaddress { 10.200.85.100 . . all the way to . 10.200.85.200 } An identical configuration is on the BACKUP machine, and it's working fine, but only up to the 20th IP. I have found a HOWTO discussing this problem. Basically, they suggest having just one VIP and routing all traffic "via" this one IP, and "all will be well". Is this a good approach? I'm running pfSense firewalls in front of the machines. Quote from the above link: ip route add $VNET/N via $VIP or route add $VNET netmask w.x.y.z gw $VIP Thanks in advance. EDIT: @David Schwartz said it would make sense to add a route, so I tried adding a static route to the pfSense firewall, but that didn't work as I expected it would. pfSense route: Interface: LAN Destination network: 10.200.85.200/32 (virtual IP) Gateway: 10.200.85.100 (floating virtual IP) Description: Route to VIP .100 I also made sure I had packet forwarding enabled on my hosts: $ cat /etc/sysctl.conf net.ipv4.ip_forward=1 net.ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1 Am I doing this wrong? I also removed all VIPs from the keepalived.conf so it only fails over 10.200.85.100.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to open server ports on TUN devices?

    - by JosephH
    If I make a VPN connection to a server (say myvpn.com; assume this server is not behind any router/firewall) via a TUN device and open a port (say 5555), will someone else be able to connect to me via myvpn.com:5555? If not, is there a tunneling software that does exactly this in a transparent manner? i.e. run any TCP/UDP-based server instance behind a router without NAT using another remote server.

    Read the article

  • setup PXE (i.e. DHCP + TFTP) server on MacOSX

    - by Albert
    What is the easiest way to setup an PXE server (i.e. a DHCP server + TFTP server) on MacOSX? Is there maybe some easy-to-use tool which just comes with both servers builtin? I have done that in the past but I remember that it took me several hours of editing some config files of tftpd (I think) and different versions of dhcpd, many trials and errors until I got it working (mostly). Now I have a fresh MacOSX installation and I want to avoid any complicated setup.

    Read the article

  • How to reliably keep an SSH tunnel open?

    - by Peltier
    I use an SSH tunnel from work to go around various idotic firewalls (it's ok with my boss :)). The problem is, after a while the ssh connection usually hangs, and the tunnel is broken. If I could at least monitor the tunnel automatically, I could restart the tunnel when it hangs, but I haven't even figured a way of doing that. Bonus points for the one who can tell me how to prevent my ssh connection from hanging, of course!

    Read the article

  • Superscope DHCP leases and configuration set up

    - by Vdub
    Hello I wanted to see if someone could help with a network problem I am having. Right now we have a super-scope and scopes of 192.168.50.1 and 192.168.51.1, as of now both are activated but only 192.168.50.1 is handing our leases, 192.168.51 wont. here is a summary of our network Gateway: watchguard firebox x750e for our router/gateway at 192.168.50.1 I set up as a secondary IP address 192.168.51.1 Server: Server 2008 r2 standard, running our DNS @ 192.168.50.242 and 8.8.8.8 as a secondary, AD, and DHCP. On that NIC card i have 192.168.50.242 as the IP address and 192.168.51.242 as a secondary. 192.168.50.1 as the default gateway and 192.168.51.1 as a secondary. Im am not very knowledgeable at this but as far as i have researched after adding a super scope and activating scopes, they should automatically start handing out addresses and I cant figure out why only one does. any help at all would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Strange WiFi problem - network is "not connected" but works

    - by GalacticCowboy
    Background I'm using a Windows XP tablet PC connected to my home network. I do broadcast the SSID, but otherwise the wireless network is locked down as tight as I can make it - WPA2 with a strong key, MAC filtering, etc. I've had this computer for about 4 years and the router for about 6 months. Before that, the previous router was set up in the same way, and I've never had any particular problems. Problem This morning - as I type this, as a matter of fact - Windows is reporting that none of my network connections are connected. Yet somehow my Internet connectivity still works! ipconfig reports a valid IP address, domain, etc., even though Windows apparently doesn't know about it. I tried repairing the connection and it had no effect - the repair eventually timed out. I'm pretty sure that I could reboot the computer and/or the router, etc. and it would fix the problem. However, I'm more interested in knowing if any of you have ever seen anything like this, and what might have caused it? Since it works I'm not inclined to mess with it too much. My concern is that it's a precursor to bigger problems.

    Read the article

  • Creating a network link between 2 very close buildings

    - by Daniel Johnson
    I have a charity who have two adjacent medium sized modern detached houses (in the UK): the buildings stand next to each other and are less than 5 metres apart. They have DSL connected to a single computer in one of the buildings. They want to add a network with wireless, and want it to work across both buildings. Being a charity they need to keep costs down. The network would be used for sharing Word documents, e-mail, browsing and skyping. My initial thoughts were to connect the buildings with fibre. So: Option 1 Use fibre between the buildings. Sufficient cable and two TP-LINK MC100CM Fast Ethernet Media Converters. Cost ~£80.00. But there is the extra cost and hassle of running the cable down and up the external walls, lifting and relaying paving, and burying underground. Never having fitted fibre I'm also a little worried about going up the wall and then bending the cable at 90 degrees to go through the wall and into the building. Option 2 Use two TP-Link TL-WA7510N High Powered Outdoor 5Ghz 15dBi Wireless antennas to connect the buildings. There is a clear line of sight at first floor level. Cost ~£100. And much easier to fit than fibre! Is using the TL-WA7510Ns overkill? Is there something more suitable? I had hoped to use some Netgear stuff, e.g. two DGN2200, one in each house and also use them to provide the wireless link between the buildings. However, in bridge mode wireless client association is not available and repeater mode with client association only supports WEP security which isn't strong enough. Is there something similar that would be up to the job? Option 3 Connect the buildings with UTP cable. My concerns here are risk of electric shock due to a difference of potential between the buildings (or are they so close this shouldn't be an issue) and protection from lightning strikes. Is fitting lighting arrestors expensive? And what can be done to ameliorate against the risk of shock? This all falls outside my area of expertise so I would really appreciate some advice.

    Read the article

  • Auto switching between wired and wireless connections

    - by Joe
    How about this situation. Our business deals a lot with medical information. And some of our clients have demands based off HIPPA, etc. There is one now where they do not want an employee to have both wired and wireless on at same time. If the wireless is on the wired needs to be turned off automatically and vice versa. However, this can not be up to the end user to manage! I have looked for third party applications and only have found http://www.wirelessautoswitch.com Does anyone know of anything else that is out there? Or possible something that can be done via group policy, etc.?

    Read the article

  • Auto switching between wired and wireless connections

    - by Joe
    How about this situation. Our business deals a lot with medical information. And some of our clients have demands based off HIPPA, etc. There is one now where they do not want an employee to have both wired and wireless on at same time. If the wireless is on the wired needs to be turned off automatically and vice versa. However, this can not be up to the end user to manage! I have looked for third party applications and only have found http://www.wirelessautoswitch.com Does anyone know of anything else that is out there? Or possible something that can be done via group policy, etc.?

    Read the article

  • Netgear router is not resolving hostnames

    - by Thomas Clayson
    Not sure what the problem is, but I am used to being able to access other clients on my LAN via their hostname. We got a new router from plusnet (Netgear WNR1000v3) and now this has stopped working. For instance, if I were to run a web server from one computer with the hostname TomPC usually I could go into a browser and type http://TomPC and I would get the web server front page. I can access it by using the LAN ip of the machine. e.g. http://192.168.1.1 works fine. I thought it would be a simple option in the admin panel of the router - possibly I had to turn on DNS/DCHP or something. But I can't see anything, and my searches on the internet seem to turn up ridiculous solutions involving setting up a dedicated DNS server on my LAN. This is just a small home network - really I just want to be able to access my Raspberry PI on the network without having to work out the IP address every time. (I know I could just set a static IP address for it, but using its hostname would be much easier). DCHP is enabled in the LAN settings part, although RIP is disabled (I don't know what the latter is) I don't know if this has anything to do with it? Many thanks!

    Read the article

  • What is fastest way to backup a disk image over LAN?

    - by David Balažic
    Sometimes I boot sysrescd or a similar live linux on a PC to backup the hardrive over local network to my server. I noticed many times, that the transfer speed is not optimal (slower than HDD and network speed). Any rules of thumb what to do and what to avoid? What I typically do is something like: dd bs=16M if=/dev/sda | nc ... # on client nc ... | dd bs=16M of=/destination/disk/backup1 # on server I also "throw" in lzop (other are way too slow) and sometimes on the fly md5sum calculation (both of uncompressed and compress source). I try to add (m)buffer (or other alternatives) to improve throughput (and get a progress indicator). I noticed that even with enough free CPU, adding commands to the pipeline slows things down. Typically the destination is on a NTFS volume (accessed via ntfs-3g, with the _big_writes_ option).

    Read the article

  • D-LINK DIR-615 router keeps giving my wireless devices bad ip addresses

    - by mlsteeves
    I have a D-LINK DIR-615 router, and wired devices have no problem getting an IP, however; wireless devices end up with a 169.254.. address (subsequently, they cannot access the internet through the router). I have removed all wired connections from the router, so there is no other dhcp server running. I've also gone back to the store, and replaced it with another, thinking that maybe it was defective. According to the router, it gave 192.168.0.101 to the wireless device. According to the wireless device it got 169.254.67.71. I've tried both a laptop and an iPod Touch, both exhibit the same behaviour. Has anyone seen this type of behaviour, or have any ideas of stuff to try? NEW INFORMATION I looked at the logs on the router, and when the wireless device tries to connect, this is what is logged: Sep 10 18:13:39 UDHCPD sending OFFER of 192.168.0.111 Sep 10 18:13:31 UDHCPD sending OFFER of 192.168.0.111 Sep 10 18:13:26 UDHCPD sending OFFER of 192.168.0.111 Sep 10 18:13:23 UDHCPD sending OFFER of 192.168.0.111 Sep 10 18:13:21 UDHCPD sending OFFER of 192.168.0.111 I connected a computer directly to the router, and here is what it looks like: Sep 10 18:14:18 UDHCPD Inform: add_lease 192.168.0.110 Sep 10 18:14:14 UDHCPD sending ACK to 192.168.0.110 Sep 10 18:14:14 UDHCPD sending OFFER of 192.168.0.110 Not sure if that helps or not.

    Read the article

  • Configure linux machine as bridge/switch and end device

    - by leemes
    At my home, I have two desktop PCs in two rooms. The router / DSL modem is in one of these rooms. Now I want to configure a home server (having 2 LAN ports, running 24/7) in the corridor between the two rooms, using only one LAN cable at each door. This gives me the following physical configuration: (door) (door) .----/-/----. .-----/-/----------._ FritzBox | | | .----´´ DSL Router PC1 Server | PC2 As just said, the server has 2 network interfaces and is running Ubuntu. What I need now is a network configuration which enables both the server and PC1 to connect to the router. I think the server needs to serve as a bridge or switch. Currently, all computers are configured having static IP addresses. If I'm understanding it correctly, a bridge / switch doesn't have its own IP address, but as the server needs to be configured as an own end device, it needs to have one. My first question is, do I have to configure both interfaces separately, giving both the same static IP address? My next question is, how do I bridge the two physical networks into one? I have basic understanding (but am always confused again and again) of bridges and switches, but I don't know how to configure it in software. I only know that it's possible to do so :) The third question is: Is it possible to configure this in a way that network packets from/to PC1 to/from the router only go through hardware or only consume low CPU in the server? Can you help me? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173  | Next Page >