Search Results

Search found 11687 results on 468 pages for 'ex networking guy'.

Page 187/468 | < Previous Page | 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194  | Next Page >

• Random TCP Resets

  - by allenwei

  We got randomly TCP "reset" error when we send request to remote server. Log from remote server Cisco TCP Connection Terminated,Nov 05 14:43:39 EST: %ASA-session-6-302014: Teardown TCP connection 640068283 for Outside:xxxx to xxxx duration 0:00:00 bytes 4160 TCP Reset-O One my local machine I saw when I use netstat 100703 connections reset due to unexpected data 324186 connections reset due to early user close I also use tcpdump to see what's wrong with it, I saw xxxx.https: Flags [R.], seq 290, ack 1369, win 136, options [nop,nop,TS val 2871790533 ecr 1897173283], length 0 The problem just happened today, we didn't change anything on our server. Anyone know what's wrong with it? Is it related to code we wrote send out request or related to linux configuration?

  Read the article

• Losing WLAN connections but maintaining internet connections on WIndows 7 Workgroup

  - by Di

  I have 4 computers all running Windows 7 networked in a Work group through Billion 7404vgp-m wireless router. All drivers and firmware for wireless adapters and router are up to date. Windows Firewall and Defender disabled. Disconnected ipv6. Running Nod 32 anti virus software. All have own static IP address 192.XXX.X.XXX. When I Reset the router all computers have Internet and LAN access for about 1 hour and then they will lose the LAN connection but maintain Internet connection. Resetting wireless adapters or restarting computers does nothing to fix this but resetting router will. What is causing this? How do I fix it?

  Read the article

• Right solution for /etc/hosts file reset on reboot

  - by user846226

  i've just installed funtoo and after setting the FQDN on /etc/conf.d/hostname i noticed when setting a list of aliases in /etc/hosts file it get overwtiten on each reboot. Someone points to set the aliases to 127.0.0.2 ip address but that's not a valid solution for me. Could someone point me to the file where i should place entries like 127.0.0.1 local.foo 127.0.0.1 local.bar in order to make them persist in /etc/hosts after rebooting? Thanks! PD: I think openresolv could be the one who is overwritting the file.

  Read the article

• Set up router to vpn into proxy server

  - by NKimber

  I have a small network with a single LinkSys router connected to broadband in US via Comcast. I have a VPN proxy server account that I can use with a standard Windows connection, allowing me to have a geographic IP fingerprint in Europe, this is useful for a number of purposes. I want to setup a 2nd router that automatically connects via VPN to this proxy service, so any hardware that is connected to router 2 looks as though it is originating network requests in Europe, and any hardware connected to my main router has normal Comcast traffic (all requests are originating from USA). My 2nd router is a LinkSys WRT54G2, I'm having trouble getting this configured. Question, is what I'm trying to do even feasible? Should the WRT54G2 be able to do this with native functionality? Would flashing it with DD-WRT allow me to achieve my objectives?

  Read the article

• How to connect another computer to the router

  - by Call Me Dummy

  I already have a Windows 7 PC connected to my NETGEAR WGR614v10 router and I am able to use internet in that computer. Now I need to connect one of my old computer to the router to share the internet. It's also running Windows 7. I already connected it to the router via a CAT-5 cable but I am not able to use internet. The first computer was set up by a technician. Its IP address is 192.168.1.3, and the default gateway is 192.168.1.1. On the second PC, I changed the IPv4 to 192.168.1.4 and default gateway and preferred DNS to 192.168.1.1, but it's not working. What can I do?

  Read the article

• Selectively routing traffic via ethernet or wifi, with proper DNS (Mac OS X 10.6)

  - by Dan

  When I'm at work, I access various intranet pages as well as the wider Internet through ethernet. However, the company LAN blocks some ports (e.g. Google Calendar). I can get to those through WiFi. So, I gave the Airport priority, and then using route add, I set up selective routing: all intranet traffic goes through the ethernet and everything else via WiFi: sudo route add 10.0.0.0/8 <intranet gateway>. However, there are a number of intranet sites that have their own DNS; i.e., hr.company.com only resolves on the intranet. The only way that I can get the DNS to work properly is to add the internal DNS server to the Airport DNS listing, however I fear that when I go elsewhere and forget, this will break things. What's the right way to get the DNS to resolve using this setup?

  Read the article

• Why does my ping command (Windows) results alternate between "timeout" and "network is not reachable"?

  - by Sopalajo de Arrierez

  My Windows is in Spanish, so I will have to paste console outputs in that language (I think that translating without knowing the exact terms used in english versions could give worse results than leaving it as it appears on screen). This is the issue: when pinging a non-existent IP from a WinXP-SP3 machine (clean Windows install, just formatted), I get sometimes a "Timeout" result, and sometimes a "network is not reachable" message. This is the result of: ping 192.168.210.1 Haciendo ping a 192.168.210.1 con 32 bytes de datos: Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Respuesta desde 80.58.67.86: Red de destino inaccesible. Respuesta desde 80.58.67.86: Red de destino inaccesible. Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Estadísticas de ping para 192.168.210.1: Paquetes: enviados = 4, recibidos = 2, perdidos = 2 (50% perdidos), Tiempos aproximados de ida y vuelta en milisegundos: Mínimo = 0ms, Máximo = 0ms, Media = 0ms 192.168.210.1 does not exist on the network. DHCP client is enabled, and the computer gets assigned those network config by the router. My IP: 192.168.11.2 Netmask: 255.255.255.0 Gateway: 192.168.11.1 DNS: 80.58.0.33/194.224.52.36 This is the output from "route print command": =========================================================================== Rutas activas: Destino de red Máscara de red Puerta de acceso Interfaz Métrica 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.11.1 192.168.11.2 20 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.168.11.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.11.2 192.168.11.2 20 192.168.11.2 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 20 192.168.11.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.11.2 192.168.11.2 20 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 192.168.11.2 192.168.11.2 20 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.11.2 192.168.11.2 1 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.11.2 3 1 Puerta de enlace predeterminada: 192.168.11.1 =========================================================================== Rutas persistentes: ninguno The output of: ping 1.1.1.1 Haciendo ping a 1.1.1.1 con 32 bytes de datos: Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Estadísticas de ping para 1.1.1.1: Paquetes: enviados = 4, recibidos = 0, perdidos = 4 1.1.1.1 does not exist on the network. and the output of: ping 10.1.1.1 Haciendo ping a 10.1.1.1 con 32 bytes de datos: Respuesta desde 80.58.67.86: Red de destino inaccesible. Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Respuesta desde 80.58.67.86: Red de destino inaccesible. Estadísticas de ping para 10.1.1.1: Paquetes: enviados = 4, recibidos = 2, perdidos = 2 (50% perdidos), 10.1.1.1 does not exist on the network. I can do some aproximate translation of what you demand if necessary. I have another computers in the same network (WinXP-SP3 and Win7-SP1), and they have, too, this problem. Gateway (Router): Buffalo WHR-HP-GN (official Buffalo firmware, not DD-WRT). I have some Linux (Debian/Kali) machine in my network, so I tested things on it: ping 192.168.210.1 PING 192.168.210.1 (192.168.210.1) 56(84) bytes of data. From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=1 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=2 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=3 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=4 Packet filtered to the non-existing 1.1.1.1 : ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. ^C --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 153 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 153215ms (no response after waiting a few minutes). and the non-existing 10.1.1.1: ping 10.1.1.1 PING 10.1.1.1 (10.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=20 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=22 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=23 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=24 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=25 Packet filtered What is going on here? I am posing this question mainly for learning purposes, but there is another reason: when all pings are returning "timeout", it creates an %ERRORLEVEL% value of 1, but if there is someone of "Network is not reachable" type, %ERRORLEVEL% goes to 0 (no error), and this could be inappropriate for a shell script (we can not use ping to detect, for example, if the network is down due to loss of contact with the gateway).

  Read the article

• Sharing wifi connection

  - by andser

  I have some little problem while sharing wifi connection. I have 2 laptops. I need connection scheme like this: laptop1 [wlan0] >>>>>>>> laptop2 [wlan0] (in ad-hoc mode, as ap, etc) >>>>> laptop2 [wlan1] >>>> internet. laptop1 [wlan0] connecting to laptop2 [wlan0]. laptop2 connecting to internet through wlan1. Is it possible? OS: Ubuntu on both machines I tried this man (setting laptop2 wlan0 in ad-hoc mode): https://help.ubuntu.com/community/WifiDocs/Adhoc#Network_Manager laptop1 connects to laptop2, but can't access to internet.

  Read the article

• Asterisk server firewall script allows 2-way audio from incoming calls, but not on outgoing?

  - by cappie

  I'm running an Asterisk PBX on a virtual machine directly connected to the Internet and I really want to prevent script kiddies, l33t h4x0rz and actual hackers access to my server. The basic way I protect my calling-bill now is by using 32 character passwords, but I would much rather have a way to protect The firewall script I'm currently using is stated below, however, without the established connection firewall rule (mentioned rule #1), I cannot receive incoming audio from the target during outgoing calls: #!/bin/bash # first, clean up! iptables -F iptables -X iptables -t nat -F iptables -t nat -X iptables -t mangle -F iptables -t mangle -X iptables -P INPUT ACCEPT iptables -P FORWARD DROP # we're not a router iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT # don't allow invalid connections iptables -A INPUT -m state --state INVALID -j DROP # always allow connections that are already set up (MENTIONED RULE #1) iptables -A INPUT -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # always accept ICMP iptables -A INPUT -p icmp -j ACCEPT # always accept traffic on these ports #iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT # always allow DNS traffic iptables -A INPUT -p udp --sport 53 -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p udp --dport 53 -j ACCEPT # allow return traffic to the PBX iptables -A INPUT -p udp -m udp --dport 50000:65536 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p udp -m udp --dport 10000:20000 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p udp --destination-port 5060:5061 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --destination-port 5060:5061 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -m multiport -p udp --dports 10000:20000 iptables -A INPUT -m multiport -p tcp --dports 10000:20000 # IP addresses of the office iptables -A INPUT -s 95.XXX.XXX.XXX/32 -j ACCEPT # accept everything from the trunk IP's iptables -A INPUT -s 195.XXX.XXX.XXX/32 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -s 195.XXX.XXX.XXX/32 -j ACCEPT # accept everything on localhost iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT # accept all outgoing traffic iptables -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT # DROP everything else #iptables -A INPUT -j DROP I would like to know what firewall rule I'm missing for this all to work.. There is so little documentation on which ports (incoming and outgoing) asterisk actually needs.. (return ports included). Are there any firewall/iptables specialists here that see major problems with this firewall script? It's so frustrating not being able to find a simple firewall solution that enabled me to have a PBX running somewhere on the Internet which is firewalled in such a way that it can ONLY allows connections from and to the office, the DNS servers and the trunk(s) (and only support SSH (port 22) and ICMP traffic for the outside world). Hopefully, using this question, we can solve this problem once and for all.

  Read the article

• Can i change the subnet on the vpn side of a server without having to change its whole lan (to avoid collission)

  - by Gusty

  Ohai, ive got a xp server with a client connecting via VPN. Problem (as we all know) is that sometimes the subnets clash. Instead of changing the whole server network every time this happens, cant i just have the server appear to have a different subnet to vpn clients? I have no interest in accessing other computers than the server on its LAN. I tried just turning off automatic dhcp in the servers vpn settings and changed it to 172.31.255.x. The client gets the address assigned alright and it can ping 172.31.255.1 but i cannot ping the server name (because the dns on the clients vpn connection points at 192.168.0.1?) wisdom? PS everything worked until the client hit a network with the same subnet as the server lan. thanks

  Read the article

• Bringing the xenbr0 interface up on XEN under Ubuntu 8.04

  - by iyl

  I installed XEN on Ubuntu 8.04 using this tutorial: http://www.howtoforge.com/ubuntu-8.04-server-install-xen-from-ubuntu-repositories but after I reboot with the XEN kernel, I don't have xenbr0 device. I see that network-bridge script runs and it creates peth0 device, but not xenbr0. I have a very basic IP setup, with a single static IP defined in /etc/network/interfaces. The only unusual thing is that my hosting (1&1) gave me a netmask 255.255.255.255, so I had to add the default gateway with this script: /sbin/route add -host 10.255.255.1 dev eth0 /sbin/route add default gw 10.255.255.1 Everything else is plain vanilla Ubuntu 8.04.

  Read the article

• Basic connectivity issues between Win 7 and XP mixed wired/wireless network. [Solved]

  - by Pulse

  Setup: Windows 7 x64 Ultimate desktop hard wired to Asus WL500gp router (WL500gpv2-1.9.2.7-d-r1445 firmware) Several Bridged VirtualBox VM's running XP, 7, ubuntu server 10.04, Mint 9 and SuSE 11.2 Win XP Pro SP3 notebook with D-Link Airplus wireless network card. No firewall or other security software currently running on either platform (at least for the duration of the test) Situation: Router is acting DHCP server Clients are receiving correct addresses and additional parameters Internet connectivity is available from all clients Windows 7 sharing is set to Network type = work (not home group) NetBT is disabled on all clients using smb over TCP What I can do: I can ping the router and internet addresses from the wireless XP notebook I can ping the Win 7 desktop and any VM from the XP wireless notebook I can ping all devices from the router All VM's and 7 can ping each other and the router as well as Internet addresses What I can't do: I cannot ping the XP wireless notebook from either the Win 7 desktop or the VM's; it always returns a destination host unreachable error. Tracert resolves the name or the XP notebook but also returns a destination host unreachable. From the above it would seem that something is blocking connectivity in a single direction (from the Win 7 box to the Win XP notebook) only but the router can ping the XP notebook. Some fresh input would be most welcome, as this is beginning to drive me batty. Thanks

  Read the article

• Open ports broken from internal network

  - by ksvi

  Quick summary: Forwarded port works from the outside world, but from the internal network using the external IP the connection is refused. This is a simplified situation to make the explanation easier: I have a computer that is running a service on port 12345. This computer has an internal IP 192.168.1.100 and is connected directly to a modem/router which has internal IP 192.168.1.1 and external (public, static) IP 1.2.3.4. (The router is TP-LINK TD-w8960N) I have set up port forwarding (virtual server) at port 12345 to go to port 12345 at 192.168.1.100. If I run telnet 192.168.1.100 12345 from the same computer everything works. But running telnet 1.2.3.4 12345 says connection refused. If I do this on another computer (on the same internal network, connected to the router) the same thing happens. This would seem like the port forwarding is not working. However... If I run a online port checking service on my external IP and the service port it says the port is open and I can see the remote server connecting and immediately closing connection. And using another computer that is connected to the internet using a mobile connection I can also use telnet 1.2.3.4 12345 and I get a working connection. So the port forwarding seems to be working, however using external IP from the internal network doesn't. I have no idea what can be causing this, since another setup very much like this (different router) works for me. I can access a service running on a server from inside the network both through the internal and external IP.

  Read the article

• How do I bridge connections in Debian?

  - by Josh

  In windows I can select Local Area Connection and Wireless Network Connection, right click and select Bridge Connections How can I achieve the same effect in Linux? (Debian to be exact) Pretty much I want Computer B to connect to Computer A via ethernet cable. Well Computer A is connected wirelessly. Allowing Computer B to get on the internet. == UPDATE == I've enabled IP forwarding and used the following iptables command: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o wlan0 -j MASQUERADE I'm still unable to access the internet from Computer B though.

  Read the article

• Limited bandwidth and transfer rates per user.

  - by Cx03

  I searched for a while but couldn't find anything concrete, hopefully someone can help me. I'm going to be running a Debian server on a gigabit port, and want to give each user his/her fair share of internet access. The first objective is easy - transfer rates (speed) per user. From what I've looked at, IPTables/Shorewall could do the job easy. Is this easy to setup, or could one of you point me at a config? I was hoping to limit users at 300mbit or 650mbit each. The second objective gets complicated. Due to the usage of the boxes, most of the traffic will be internal network traffic that does NOT get counted to the quota. However, I still need to limit the external traffic, and if they go over, cut off access (or throttle traffic to a very low speed (10mbit?)). Let's say the user has a 3TB external traffic limit. The IF part is: If the hostname they are exchanging the traffic with DOES NOT MATCH .ovh. or .kimsufi. (company owns multiple TLDs), count to the quota. Once said quota exceeds 3TB, choke them. Where could I find a system to count that for me? It would also need to reset or be able to be manually reset on a monthly basis. Thanks ahead of time!

  Read the article

• Local Network - Windows 7 and Vista can't see each other

  - by ca8msm

  I've got a strange issue at home that has been bugging me for weeks, but I really need to get it sorted now so I'll detail as much as I can and hopefully someone can spot what might might be wrong. I have a wireless router connected to the internet and 3 devices connected to it. They are: Name OS Network IPv4 PC1 Windows 7 WORKGROUP 192.168.2.2 LAPTOP1 Vista WORKGROUP 192.168.2.3 PS3 192.168.2.4 and they all get their IP addresses dynamically. Both PC1 and LAPTOP1 can ping PS3 and get a response. PC1 and LAPTOP1 are unable to ping each other by ip address unless I ping by their name (which bizarrely shows that it is pinging via the IPv6 address). Also, to confirm this both PC1 and LAPTOP1 can ping each other via the long IPv6 address that they both have so they can obviously see each other just not via IPv4. I've disabled the firewalls on both machines as well to rule that out. I don't really know what IPv6 is used for and I've tried disabling it on both machines but all that happens then is that neither machine can see each other at all then. Does anyone have any idea of what may be stopping them seeing each other, any ways I can look at fixing this, or any network tools that may help identify where it is failing? Thanks, Mark

  Read the article

• Why some software can control the speed of the computers in Lan?

  - by Foolish

  I found some software can control the speed of the computers in lan, it seems that they use something like arp attack, can someone tell me the theory of this ? Anyone heard of P2P over software ? how it works ?

  Read the article

• Why configuring manual IP do not work for me in DHCP?

  - by user58859

  I have broadband connection in my laptop. It's getting the IP by protocol. configuration is : ip : 192.168.1.2 subnet : 255.255.255.0 gateway : 192.168.1.1 Now I am curious, In IPV4 properties when instead of choosing "Obtain an IP address automatically", I choose "Use the following IP address" and configure everything same, why it do not work? Do DHCP do not work when we configure the IP manually? (operating system : windows-7) EDIT : After configuring the ip manually, when I used ipconfig/all , it's showing dhcp enabled : NO. I am not doing it. Why it got disabled automatically? and how to enable it? DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.2(Preferred) Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled

  Read the article

• How to change the setting for a network device reported by ethtool, specifically Speed, on VM?

  - by Ramadheer Singh

  This is related to these two questions, although they don't answer my question. The machines are RHEL6. 1.ethtool not showing all the properties 2.changing network speed to 1000Mb/s Output on VM: [root@foo ~]# ethtool eth0 Settings for eth0: Current message level: 0x00000007 (7) Link detected: yes Output on Real Hardware: (interested in Speed) # ethtool eth0 Settings for eth0: Supported ports: [ TP ] Supported link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full 100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full 1000baseT/Full Supports auto-negotiation: Yes Advertised link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full 100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full 1000baseT/Full Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes ***Speed: 1000Mb/s*** Duplex: Full Port: Twisted Pair PHYAD: 1 Transceiver: internal Auto-negotiation: on Supports Wake-on: d Wake-on: d Link detected: yes if there's anyway I can set this in VM, please suggest.

  Read the article

• Cisco ASA 5505 network route for static IP hosts

  - by TheCapn

  I've configured my internal VLAN using the most basic settings where ports 1-7 are assigned from a pool of addresses in the range 192.168.15.5 - 192.168.15.36. These hosts are given access to the internet and it works great. What I'm trying to set up now is allowing users who are connected to the device and specify their IP (say I connect and request 192.168.15.45) are given internet access and can still work alongside DHCP hosts. Those with a DHCP assigned address are blocked from the internet. Mostly the issue resides in that I am very new to working with the device. I feel that the solution is easy but I'm not looking in the right spots and don't have the correct terminology down to google it. Do I need to define access control lists? Group policies? a new VLAN? The rules that are set up seem to be specific to the entire /24 subnet but when I request a static IP outside of the DHCP range I get blocked from other hosts and the internet.

  Read the article

• Any good utilities for configuring network settings on Windows XP?

  - by StackedCrooked

  I don't really like the built-in tools for configuring the network settings on Windows XP. If for some reason I can't access the internet I never know where to look. Does anyone know of a good utility for fixing your internet or local network?

  Read the article

• cisco asa + action drop issue

  - by ghp

  Have created a tunnel between 10.x.y.z network and 122.a.b.c ..the tunnel is up and active, but when I try the packet tracer output ..I get the ACTION as drop. I have also enabled same-security-traffic permit intra-interface. Can someone help me what does this drop mean? Result: input-interface: inside input-status: up input-line-status: up output-interface: outside output-status: up output-line-status: up Action: drop Drop-reason: (acl-drop) Flow is denied by configured rule Packet Tracer output @Shane Madden: please find below the packet tracer output. CASA5K-A# CASA5K-A# config t CASA5K-A(config)# packet-tracer input inside tcp 10.x.y.112 0 122.a.b.c 0 Phase: 1 Type: ROUTE-LOOKUP Subtype: input Result: ALLOW Config: Additional Information: in 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 outside Phase: 2 Type: ACCESS-LIST Subtype: Result: DROP Config: Implicit Rule Additional Information: Result: input-interface: inside input-status: up input-line-status: up output-interface: outside output-status: up output-line-status: up Action: drop Drop-reason: (acl-drop) Flow is denied by configured rule CASA5K-A(config)# ======================================================================== The access-group are as follows : access-group acl-inbound in interface outside access-group acl-outbound in interface inside and the access-list's are access-list acl-inbound extended permit tcp any any gt 1023 access-list acl-outbound extended permit ip object-group net-Source object net-dest

  Read the article

• Problem with connecting two different networks

  - by tanascius

  I have two networks: 192.168.13.0/24 (blue) and 192.168.15.0/24 (green). Computer A is connected to the 13-net, only. Computer B has two interfaces, one in each network. There is third computer that acts like a router and connects the 13-net to the 15-net (only in this direction). Now, I'd like to ping 192.168.15.100 from computer A to B. Unfortunately there is never a reply. But when I use a hub instead of a switch it works. In my opinion the ping packet travels through the switch to the router (which is the default route/gateway for A). The router sends the packet back to the switch to B. Probably B receives it on its 15-net interface but answers with it's 15th interface? Is this possible? The problem is, that B may have only a gateway 192.168.13.50 - but I am not really sure of it (B is a embedded system with limited configuration possibilities). Can anyone explain what happens here? Thank you!

  Read the article

• Choose source interface for PPTP VPN on Ubuntu

  - by Emyl

  I have an Ubuntu Virtualbox guest with two network interface, eth0 (NAT) and eth1 (bridged). I want to connect to a PPTP VPN using eth1, but I don't know how to specify which interface to use. If i just try: sudo pon myvpn nodetach It fails with: Using interface ppp0 Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/pts/1 Modem hangup Connection terminated. Looking at routes with route seems to indicate that eth0 is being used: x.x.x.x.no 10.0.2.2 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth0

  Read the article

• Avoiding QoS degradation for video streaming clients

  - by aarege31

  Suppose I have two routers connected via a 1Gbit connection. A client behind router 1 streams to a client behind router 2 while other clients behind router 1 transmit data to other clients behind router 2. Are there any best practice policing, scheduling or queue management algorithms available that help a beginner understand what is necessary to prevent QoS degration in simple cases as above as well as in real world environments?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194  | Next Page >