Search Results

Search found 5389 results on 216 pages for 'bridge router'.

Page 200/216 | < Previous Page | 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 | Next Page >

Can't access site internally, but DNS works

- by BloodyIron

1) I have apache2 running a vhost for a website. 2) This apache2 instance is already successfuly setup for other websites on it to be accessible internally and externally. 3) I am using an internal bind9 server to resolve the new website's domain internally to the private IP. This bind9 server is not public facing, nor is it the master server on the internet. 4) The DNS internally resolves to the right IP. 5) Firefox reports "server not found". 6) I have copied the config almost identically to other configs that are known to work (adjusting for proper paths of course). In turn I have reloaded and restarted apache2 repeatedly. 7) I have an entry to forward .org .info .net alternative TLDs to .com in the vhost config for this domain, and my browser goes from .org to .com despite note #5. 8) /var/log/apache2/access.log shows when someone externally tries to access the site, but no activity is observed when someone tries to access internally. Changing the log level does not appear to improve the situation. 9) I am out of ideas, nothing appears to be wrong. Please help? To be explicit. Why is this new site unreachable internally? I would like to clarify on something, even though I have already outlined this. YES I know this system is in a private network. NO it is not going through a router. YES I am using an internal DNS server (bind9) to resolve, and YES it does resolve to the proper internal IP. YES other websites on the same server setup in the same way with internal resolution work right now and have done for a while. Everything for this domain is setup the same as the other working domains as far as I can tell. The other working domains are internally AND externally accessible. This domain I am working with is only currently externally accessible. When I go to it internally firefox tells me "Server not found".

Read the article
Ping with explicit next-hop selection (aka Monitoring multiple default gateways)

- by Michuelnik

I have a linux (debian) router with two internet connections (A) and (B). (A) is preferred, (B) is fallback. I want to monitor the internet connection (and not only the availability of the gateways!) and change the default route appropriately. If (A) is not providing internet, switch to (B) If (A) is providing internet again, switch back to (A). Only problem I have is in case (2). My routing table points towards a working internet so I cannot easily detect whether internet is working over link (A) again. I am search for a ping or traceroute (or other diagnosis-tool) which can select the next-hop explicitly. ping -r looks promising, but can only ping a host on the lan. (It only has to write another destination address in the packet, damnit!) traceroute -g gateway looks even more promising and nearly does what I want - but sets source routing options which my next-hops deny. (Not within my administrative boundary...) I just want a $ping, that can: select a source interface (and address) select a next-hop on that interface ping any arbitrary ip address I could do evil trickery with policy-based routing but that would have production impact for all users. I would like to see a side-effect-free solution....

Read the article
Network switches for LAN party

- by guywhoneedsahand

I am working on setting up the network for a small LAN party (less than 16 people). Most of them do not have wireless cards in their rigs, so I need to set up some way for everyone to a) play LAN games and b) access the internet. The LAN party will probably take place in my basement, where I have enough space. However, the basement is not wired up with the router which is actually on the floor above. I make a cantenna a while back that can boost the wireless performance of my computer significantly. How can I use this to provide internet and LAN to guests? My hope was that I could use a switch like this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833181166 for the LAN - but how can I give people access to the internet? Is there such thing as a network extender / 16-port switch? Obviously, the internet performance doesn't need to be super stellar, because the games will be using LAN - so I am looking to provide some usable internet for web browsing, and very high speed LAN for games. Thanks!

Read the article
Having two IP Routes/Gateways of last Resort on an HP Switch

- by SteadH

We have an HP Layer 3 Switch that is doing IP routing between vlans. The general set up is that the switch has an IP address on each VLAN and IP routing is enabled. On our servers VLAN, we have a firewall that has a connection to the outside world. To set a IP route on the HP router, we use IOS command ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1 where 192.168.2.1 is the address of our firewall, and the zeros essentially mean to route all traffic that the switch doesn't know what to do with out the firewall as a gateway. We're in the middle of an ISP and firewall change. I set up the new firewall and ran the IOS command ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.254 (the address of the new firewall). Things started working nicely. When I reviewed the configuration of the switch though, I noticed that it did not replace the previous ip route command, but just added another route. Now, I know how to remove the old firewall route (no ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1), but what is the effect of having these two 0.0.0.0 routes? Is it switch implosion? Will a server just respond back over the route it receives the request from? I've read elsewhere that having two default gateways is an impossibility by definition, but I'm curious about this situation that our switch allowed. Thanks!

Read the article
Ubuntu IP Configuration - multiple subnets & interfaces

- by HaydnWVN

Have a 'new' mailserver running postfix on Ubuntu. We are having some problems configuring the subnets & interfaces. Basically 2 subnets (.253. & .254.) need to be connected through the 3rd subnet (.252.) where the Router is residing. # This file describes the network interfaces available on your system # and how to activate them. For more information, see interfaces(5). # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback # The primary network interface auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 10.62.254.199 netmask 255.255.0.0 network 10.62.254.0 broadcast 10.62.255.255 #gateway 10.62.252.138 # dns-* options are implemented by the resolvconf package, if installed dns-nameservers 10.62.252.138 dns-search ***.com auto eth1 iface eth1 inet static address 10.62.253.199 netmask 255.255.0.0 network 10.62.253.0 broadcast 10.62.255.255 #gateway 10.62.252.138 #dns-nameservers 10.62.254.199 10.62.253.199 10.62.252.199 dns-nameservers 10.62.252.138 dns-search ***.com auto eth2 iface eth2 inet static address 10.62.252.199 netmask 255.255.0.0 network 10.62.252.0 broadcast 10.62.255.255 gateway 10.62.252.138 #dns-nameservers 10.62.254.199 10.62.253.199 10.62.252.199 dns-search ***.com I have an external support company who are looking into this (they built and configured this server), but it's taking far too long... So I'm looking to highlight the mistake!

Read the article
iTunes Home Sharing only works one way between 2 Windows XP PC's on the same LAN

- by scunliffe

Both PC's have the latest iTunes installed. PC (A) can "see" that there is a shared library "B library" but attempts to connect to it return this error message: The shared library "{Username}'s Library" is not responding (-3259) Check that any firewall software running on either the shared computer or this computer has been set to allow communication on port 3689. however the reverse works fine. e.g. PC (B) can "see" shared library "A library" and can access all content. Notes: Both PC's have Home Sharing enabled (turned off/on several times to verify). Both PC's have Windows Firewall turned on, but in the exceptions tab, iTunes is allowed, and Port 3689 is also added as a firewall exception (just in case) Both iTunes accounts have been "authorized" on both PC's Both PC's connect via LAN via D-Link DIR-615 router. In the advanced application rules, iTunes has also been added to allow traffic on port 3689 un-hindered. Is there any other magical setting/configuration option that I should be aware of and set in order to get this to work? I could care less about sharing apps etc. I just want the music sharing to work. Update: Solved! It turns out on PC (B) there were multiple accounts set up. 1 of the accounts had the checkbox checked under the Windows firewall "On" option which states "No exceptions" thus even though it was added to the exception list on the main user account, this other account was blocking access.

Read the article
Advertise a subnet route with radvd

- by Thomas Berger

we have set up a small IPv6 Testing network. The setup looks like this: ::/0 +----------+ | Firewall | Router to the public net +----------+ | 2001:...::/106 | +----------+ +-------| SIT GW | sit Tunnel gatway to the some test users | +----------+ | +----------+ | Test Sys | Testsystem +----------+ The idea is to advertise the default route from the firewall and the route for the SIT subnets from the sit gateway. The configurations for radvd are: # Firewall interface eth0 { AdvSendAdvert on; route ::/0 { }; }; # SIT Gatway interface eth0 { AdvSendAdvert on; route 2001:...::/106 { }; }; We have captured the adv. packages with tcpdump and the packages looks good. We see a default route from the fw, and the subnet route from the SIT gatway. But if we look on the testsystem there are two default routes over both gateways. There is no subnet route. The routing does not work of course. Here the routes we get: 2001:.....::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 default via fe80::baac:6fff:fe8e:XXXX dev eth0 proto kernel metric 1024 expires 0sec mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 64 default via fe80::e415:aeff:fe12:XXXX dev eth0 proto kernel metric 1024 expires 0sec mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 64 Any Idea?

Read the article
Access server using IP on another interface

- by Markos

I am using Windows Server 2012 instead of a router for my home network. Currently I am using RRAS and computers from local network can access Internet correctly. Here is a map of the current setup: [PC1] ---| |---- (lan ip)[Server](wan ip)--> internet [PC2] ---| I have applications running on Server, such as IIS and others. All can be accessed from internet using wan ip and from lan using lan ip. I have a domain, lets say its my-domain.com, which is resolved to my wan ip. What I want is to enable my LAN computers to be able to connect to services on my server using the very same address as internet users: eg http://my-domain.com/. However this does not work for my lan computers. What I understand is that I need to set up some kind of loopback route in a way that packets comming to LAN interface get routed to WAN interface. But I haven't found how to achieve this (in fact, I don't know WHAT to search for). Feel free to ask for additional informations and I will try to update the question.

Read the article
Looking for ballpark pricing on an affordable a Cisco VOIP solution for our office

- by guytech

We have about 8 incoming PSTN lines that are currently on an old and antiquated Nortel Meridian ICS system. This system has been giving us some grief. We're looking for a new VOIP solution. I've been looking at a Cisco solution and it does seem pricey but I'm sure effective. Unfortunately, we probably can't afford a Cisco Unified Communications 520 which seems to be the ideal solution. We have about 15 people who need an extension and voicemail. We really don't have any need for a fancy system just an auto attendant of some sort when people call us. It looks like we'll have to get an older router and an addon card for what we're looking for to get best value pricing. However, I don't know a a lot about Cisco voice products so I'm a bit lost as to what to get. The only thing I am sure on is the pricing on VOIP phones which we expect to be about ~$100-200. However, I'm not sure what pieces of VOIP infrastructure to get. Any advice? I am familiar with Asterisk but right now I'm looking on pricing concerning a Cisco solution.

Read the article
vSphere Promiscuous mode only receiving packets one way from network switch

- by steve.lippert

We have two network switches, a POE switch (SwitchA) to power our phones / users computers and a non-POE switch (SwitchB for the rest network.) Each switch is setup to do port mirroring to support our VoIP recording system. SwitchA does port mirroring on specific ports if we need to record a user. SwitchB mirrors one port to monitor our work at home users (Internet comes in from managed router, to switch, back out to our firewall.) These two port mirroring setups feed into one vmware vSphere 4.1 server, it has four total physical cards. The other two NICs feed into an unmanaged switch for connecting to the rest of the network. Once into the vSphere server all network ports go into a vSwitch, and then one of the servers (Windows 2008 R2) sniffs them out and does its thing. Everything is working fine and dandy from SwitchB. But on SwitchA we only receive one side of the VoIP packets (going out to the phone, nothing coming in from the phone). Troubleshooting steps I have taken so far: I hooked up my laptop to the monitor port on SwitchB and I see both sides of the packets. I swapped which network interface is plugged into the monitor port on SwitchA. Because everything feeds into one vSwitch / vNetwork and both sides of the conversation arrive just fine from SwitchB I believe everything is configured correctly on the vSphere server/guest. What could be causing one way packets to arrive on my guest machine from only one interface, but not the other? Could a bad cable be causing the problems from SwitchB?

Read the article
Delayed internet access

- by Joel Coel

When I (and presumably my users) first start up or log in to my computer I can't get internet access until several minutes after logging in. Internet pages like serverfault.com will time out. During this time I can access internal web servers. Sometimes pinging the gateway seems to fix the problem. I'm using Windows 7 on this machine with wifi, and the problem seems limited to the wifi network, which is on a separate vlan. The wired network does not share the problem, but I know it's not the wifi connection itself because the internal sites work. The wifi access point is attached to a 3Com 4200 switch, with the port set for vlan 2 untagged, vlan 1 tagged. The 4200 has a fiber connection to a 3Com 4900SX fiber switch that acts almost as a router here. The fiber connection is vlan 1 untagged vlan 2 tagged at both ends. The gateway is then attached to a different 4200 (vlan 1 untagged, vlan 2 tagged) that has a similar fiber connection to the 4900SX. vlan 2 has 192.168.8.0/22 IPs, vlan 1 has 10.1.0.0/16 IPs. The 4900SX has an interface for both vlans (10.1.1.1/192.168.8.1), as does the gateway (10.1.1.5/192.168.8.5). There is one dchp server for both vlans on the same switch as the gateway. It chooses a dhcp scope based on the interface used by the 4900sx to forward the dhcp request. There is also a network access list on the 4900sx set to deny all vlan2 traffic to any 10.1.x.x host, with exceptions made for a few servers, including dhcp, 4900sx, and the gateway. I think that about covers it. Any ideas on why internet access would be delayed like this?

Read the article
Cisco 7206 error trying to copy running-config (Bad file number)

- by jasondewitt

I have a cisco 7206 that terminates a bunch of pppoa sessions for dsl users. Today I noticed that if I tried to "show run" nothing happened. I mean that it doesn't show anything and just sends me right back to the command prompt. I decided I should probably try and back up the config and that is where I'm stuck. Any time I try to copy the running-config to tftp or to pcmcia card that I know is not full I get the following error: %Error opening system:/running-config (Bad file number) I get this error when I try to do anything with the running config. I've been googling around, but I haven't found any thing else that talks about this error. I've seen people say to erase the nvram and then try to "copy run start", but I don't want to erase the nvram until I can pull off a copy of the running-config. I would try to reboot it, but the startup-config that is on the nvram looks to be woefully out of date (good job me!). Any ideas what might be wrong? or how I can get the running config off the router?

Read the article
VPN - local and remote networks IP collision

- by Guido García

I have created a VPN connection in Windows using the New Network Connection wizard that comes with Windows. It works without problems in most places, but there is one concrete place where, despite the connection to the remote public IP works fine, it is not able to validate the login/password and establish the VPN connection. In this place, the network is 10.0.0.x (the same I use in other places where I am able to connect). The remote network is 192.168.x.x, so I suspect there is some kind of IP collision, because before connecting, a traceroute to i.e. 192.168.0.40 does not fail. 1 4 ms 1 ms 1 ms LINKSYS [10.0.0.1] 2 5 ms 1 ms 1 ms 172.26.27.1 3 4 ms 5 ms 3 ms 192.168.1.100 ... (more) I can't modify the local network further than the first router (10.0.0.1). That is the only different I've found so far. Any idea about how to solve it? Thank you.

Read the article
Preventing endless forwarding with two routers

- by jarmund

The network in quesiton looks basically like this: /----Inet1 / H1---[111.0/24]---GW1---[99.0/24] \----GW2-----Inet2 Device explaination H1: Host with IP 192.168.111.47 GW1: Linux box with IPs 192.168.111.1 and 192.168.99.2, as well as its own route to the internet. GW2: Generic wireless router with IP 192.168.99.1 and its own route to the internet. Inet1 & Inet2: Two possible routes to the internet In short: H has more than one possible route to the internet. H is supposed to only access the internet via GW2 when that link is up, so GW1 has some policy based routing special just for H1: ip rule add from 192.168.111.47 table 991 ip route add default via 192.168.99.1 table 991 While this works as long as GW2 has a direct link to the internet, the problem occurs when that link is down. What then happens is that GW2 forwards the packet back to GW1, which again forwards back to GW2, creating an endless loop of TCP-pingpong. The preferred result would be that the packet was just dropped. Is there something that can be done with iptables on GW1 to prevent this? Basically, an iptables-friendly version of "If packet comes from GW2, but originated from H1, drop it" Note1: It is preferable not to change anything on GW2. Note2: H1 needs to be able to talk to both GW1 and GW2, and vice versa, but only GW2 should lead to the internet TLDR; H1 should only be allowed internet access via GW2, but still needs to be able to talk to both GW1 and GW2. EDIT: The interfaces for GW1 are br0.105 for the '99' network, and br0.111 for the '111' network. The sollution may or may not be obnoxiously simple, but i have not been able to produce the proper iptables syntax myself, so help would be most appreciated. PS: This is a follow-up question from this question

Read the article
Ubuntu 10.04 network manager issues

- by Shark

I was using the default network manager to connect to my wi-fi network, but if the connection is dropped or router restarted the network manager wont reconnect automatically after i guess a couple of tries and just gives a pop-up to connect manually . To avoid this annoyance I installed WICD but though it does try to reconnect to the network after a drop in connection it is unable to resolve the ip address and i am left with an even bigger annoyance . 1. Is there a way to counter either of these issues ? 2. Something like a background process that will check network status periodically and then try to connect to a favored network ? Edit- out put of lshw -C network *-network description: Wireless interface product: Broadcom Corporation vendor: Broadcom Corporation physical id: 0 bus info: pci@0000:12:00.0 logical name: eth1 version: 01 serial: c0:cb:38:18:9b:7f width: 64 bits clock: 33MHz capabilities: pm msi pciexpress bus_master cap_list ethernet physical wireless configuration: broadcast=yes driver=wl0 driverversion=5.60.48.36 ip=192.168.11.2 latency=0 multicast=yes wireless=IEEE 802.11 resources: irq:17 memory:fbc00000-fbc03fff *-network description: Ethernet interface product: RTL8101E/RTL8102E PCI Express Fast Ethernet controller vendor: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. physical id: 0 bus info: pci@0000:13:00.0 logical name: eth0 version: 02 serial: f0:4d:a2:94:2d:74 size: 10MB/s capacity: 100MB/s width: 64 bits clock: 33MHz capabilities: pm msi pciexpress msix vpd bus_master cap_list rom ethernet physical tp mii 10bt 10bt-fd 100bt 100bt-fd autonegotiation configuration: autonegotiation=on broadcast=yes driver=r8169 driverversion=2.3LK-NAPI duplex=half latency=0 link=no multicast=yes port=MII speed=10MB/s resources: irq:29 ioport:e000(size=256) memory:d0b10000-d0b10fff(prefetchable) memory:d0b00000-d0b0ffff(prefetchable) memory:fb200000-fb21ffff(prefetchable)

Read the article
Easiest way to do host name resolution with IPA?

- by Luke

We are currently using static LAN IP addresses for our internal non-public facing servers. We don't have DHCP configured. We're using Vyatta for our router and firewall. The firewall is configured to be zone based. We want to setup IPA for centralized authentication (LDAP+Kerberos). IPA is requiring resolvable host names. I want to avoid having to enter DNS records by hand. What is the most painless way to make host names resolvable that works with IPA in a Linux only environment? We arn't using anything to resolve host names now. Up until now we've been using static ip addresses and local users on each server. We've looked at BIND, DHCP (does that even solve the problem?), and multicast DNS. At this point we're not sure which solution would work best. Is there another option we haven't considered? Security is very important. We have multiple zones where each zone has very specific or no access to another zone. DNS for public domains is forwarded from Vyatta to our ISP's DNS server.

Read the article
DNS lookup fails when with all the MAC workstations

- by user39564

Hi, I am having this insane problem. We are mac-heavy users. Around 10 workstations, one Xserve server, two windows workstation and one Linux (me). Last year I added an A record to our domain's DNS. However we had to change that a few months ago to a new IP. But all the Mac workstations fail to resolve the proper DNS and they still resolve to the old IP, even after 2 months. On both the windows workstation and my linux box a simple nslookup resolves to proper IP. However, on ALL the mac workstation, dig and nslookup report the old IP address. From my linux workstation: jp@lo:~$ nslookup - 208.67.222.222 client.xyz.com Server: 208.67.222.222 Address: 208.67.222.222#53 Non-authoritative answer: Name: client.xyz.com Address: 68.71.40.xx But when I am trying the exact same command from any Mac workstation, I get the old IP: $ nslookup - 208.67.222.222 client.xyz.com Server: 208.67.222.222 Address: 208.67.222.222#53 Non-authoritative answer: Name: client.xyz.com Address: 98.143.155.xx The strange thing is that this only happens in our internal network. No problem from home nor from another server. I did try to flush the DNS, don't worry. It did not help. I am starting to wonder if my router (OpenWRT) or Mac OS X Server is not in some way spoofing the DNS request and thus acting as a cache. Any suggestions/comments would be grateful. Thank you, JP

Read the article
Network Security Device/Software

- by Campo

We currently run Symantec Antivirus Corporate 10.2. The software is really easy to manage on a network but the actual virus detection isn't bad but the malware detection is crap. We recently were infected with a email bot that got us put on some block lists. This has been resolved. I cannot have that happen again. I would like to find a program as easy to manage as symantec that I can install on all the user's workstations as well as the servers. We run a windows 2003 domain. We have a couple 2008 test servers in the environment. Most of the workstations are xp though I am using windows 7 and symantect is not compatible with this OS... So we need a solution that would cover all those operating systems. If it could be installed on macs too that would be a bonus though not necessary at all. This software must detect: Viruses AND Malware I am looking for something that combines the features in anti-malware programs like malwarebytes or spybot with an antivirus program like symantec or AVG. Alternatively if there is a piece of hardware that is a firewall, router, and packet inspection for virus/spam that would be the most ideal solution. I then could supplement with a piece of software that could pickup what the hardware misses. Thank you for your suggestions.

Read the article
How to monitor bandwidth use of each device on wifi network

- by GWLlosa

I have in my home a standard Comcast cable internet connection. I have it going from the wall to a cable modem, and from the modem to a late-series Linksys router, which provides wired and wireless networking. The vast majority of the users are wireless connections. For day-to-day tasks, this connection is fully sufficient for all my needs. However, on regular occassions, we have social gatherings that involve many people bringing laptops and other PCs and using the network and internet simultaneously, frequently for gaming. I have no administrative oversight over these machines; they have been known to be riddled with spyware and/or bloatware or be running torrents, legal or otherwise. The only reason I care is that on a regular basis, one of the machines will flatline my internet bandwith, and consume it all in order to upload/download/spam people/whatever. When this happens, the latency of the connections for gaming and the like becomes unacceptable, and everyone suffers. My question is: Is there a system I can set up whereby I can easily monitor the various systems connected to my wireless connection, see how much bandwith each one is using, and for what ends? That way, at a glance, I can spot the offending machine and kick it from the connection, without having to go from machine to machine, checking each one's "bandwith used" properties manually, and dealing with the owner's indignant protests all the while. I understand this will likely involve 3rd-party software and/or hardware; my issue is I don't even know where to begin.

Read the article
Memory overcommitment on VmWare ESXi 5.0

- by Tibor

I would like to understand better the possibilities of VmWare ESXi memory overcommitment. I've read this paper from VmWare, so I am familiar with general concepts, such as hypervisor swapping, memory balooning and page sharing. It seems that a combination of these techniques allows for quite a large degree of overcommitment. However, I am not sure. I am deploying a virtual test lab comprising of 4 identical sets of virtual servers and workstations and a couple of virtual router instances. Overall, I expect to be running around 20 virtual machines with Windows XP, Windows 7 and Ubuntu for workstation hosts as well as CentOS and Windows 2008 Server instances for servers. The problem is, however, that the host machine only has 12GB of RAM and I don't have an option to stuff in some more. I would like to know what is the best option to configure hosts in order to achieve reasonable performance within the constrains. I have these two options: Allocate as little as possible of RAM to each virtual machine. Allocate an extraordinary amount (such as 4 GB per instance) and let the baloon driver do the rest. Something else? Which would work better? Machines will mostly be idle, so I don't have any major performance expectations, but they should run reasonably smoothly nevertheless.

Read the article
C# sends SQL data 4 times less from one box than from another

- by Bobb

W2003, .NET 3.5, SQL 2008 I have prod and UAT app servers deployed in 2 different data centres. I have a C# app which reads text file, parse the text and sends the data to the SQL in bulk. SQL server is in US and the app servers are in London (but in different places). All POPs have dedicated network connections. There is no public internet involved. When the app runs on UAT server I can see in Perfmon that the Send byte/sec is x4 higher than from production server. My estimate is that one server outputs at 1 MB/s and the other at 250 KB/s rate. My suspicion immediately is that there is a router on one of the DCs which shapes traffic or does QoS limitation on traffice from London to US. However support and Windows team and networkig team all are saying that there are no differences in neither networking config on the 2 DCs nor NIC config on the 2 app server... How to find out why is the networking bottlneck is 4 times tighter in one place than in the other? What can I do about it?

Read the article
What can I do with a home server?

- by Joel Coehoorn

I have an old 700 Mhz Pentium III at home running Windows 2000 Server, with a home router set up to pass incoming requests to it and a DynDNS account set up so it's easy to find. Right now I'm using it for a number of things: Shared folders + backup inside the home network Shared Printer inside the home network Domain Controller, just because I feel like it and because it's useful to me as practice to keep those "enterprise" administration skills. Web Server FTP remote access for my files. I abandoned this for security reasons, but it's still worth leaving visible. Remote Desktop in to the home network (thinking about adding VPN service) SVN repository MySQL - Will be moving to SQL Server 2008 Standard soon. After I upgrade my wife's laptop from home to pro later this year it will also become a domain controller It's the only place I still have access to Internet Explorer 6 any more without setting up a new virtual machine, so I use it for testing code with that browser. The question is: What else could I be doing with this machine? Update Additional ideas based on the suggestions: Media Server/DVR Build server PBX SSH Proxy Server Continuous Integration Server Personal OpenID Provider Update2 Just a note that this server was recently upgraded to an Atom330 with 2 GB ram and bigger hard drive. For all that's slow for a "modern" cpu, it should still be much faster than the old Pentium III and the expected power savings should make the upgrade essentially free over the course of the next year or two. Also, it's now running Windows Server 2008.

Read the article
Routing WIFI and LAN for specific traffic

- by jakebird451

I have two network devices aboard my macbook pro: WIFI (en1): Used for general traffic. Connects to an ip of 192.168.19.* via DHCP LAN (en0): Used for specific traffic. Connects to an ip of 192.168.2.10 as a static IP. Does not connect to a router, only a switch for direct routing connection. I have 4 IP addresses I need to access on the LAN: 192.168.2.1 192.168.2.21 192.168.2.20 192.168.2.30 The rest of the traffic needs to go to WIFI. I have tried setting up a routing table for the specific ip addresses, but I only managed to mess up my network. I do not venture out into the world of networking too often, but this was the latest command I have been trying: sudo route add -host 192.168.2.30 -interface en0 This command killed my ability to use ping. It told me that ping could not allocate memory (is that even possible)? It also killed my wifi access. Logging out and back in fixed the issue. I really do not mind to make this solution permanent, so I am fine with a temporary routing.

Read the article
Network Sharing Issues

- by Mark Kramer

I have two computers I want to have on a network share together (so the laptop can print through the desktop's printer). These are both connected to the same router. (One wired and one wireless) And they both have the same workgroup name. However, when I type "net view" in the command prompt, the only computer that shows up is the computer I type the command into. How do I get these computers to be shared with each other? Update: The tower is running Windows XP, the Laptop is running Windows 7. I have disabled the Firewall on both until I get this set up. Update 2: Typing the command net view on my desktop is acting very strangely. Noe sometimes it only shows itself on the list of computers, sometimes it shows itself and the laptop and sometimes it doesn't work at all and displays system error 6118. I typed net view into the command prompt on the Windows 7 laptop and both computers showed up, so I went to connect to the desktop from the laptop and it said the dekptop could not be found, even though it is showing up int he list of shared computers. Here are supporting pictures (these are coming from the laptop)

Read the article
How To Monitor Home Wireless Network Connected Devices Bandwith

- by GWLlosa

(Originally posted on SuperUser, not sure if it might be better suited here) I have in my home a standard Comcast cable internet connection. I have it going from the wall to a cable modem, and from the modem to a late-series Linksys router, which provides wired and wireless networking. The vast majority of the users are wireless connections. For day-to-day tasks, this connection is fully sufficient for all my needs. However, on regular occassions, we have social gatherings that involve many people bringing laptops and other PCs and using the network and internet simultaneously, frequently for gaming. I have no administrative oversight over these machines; they have been known to be riddled with spyware and/or bloatware or be running torrents, legal or otherwise. The only reason I care is that on a regular basis, one of the machines will flatline my internet bandwith, and consume it all in order to upload/download/spam people/whatever. When this happens, the latency of the connections for gaming and the like becomes unacceptable, and everyone suffers. My question is: Is there a system I can set up whereby I can easily monitor the various systems connected to my wireless connection, see how much bandwith each one is using, and for what ends? That way, at a glance, I can spot the offending machine and kick it from the connection, without having to go from machine to machine, checking each one's "bandwith used" properties manually, and dealing with the owner's indignant protests all the while. I understand this will likely involve 3rd-party software and/or hardware; my issue is I don't even know where to begin.

Read the article

< Previous Page | 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 | Next Page >