Search Results

Search found 9758 results on 391 pages for 'wireless networking'.

Page 219/391 | < Previous Page | 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226  | Next Page >

  • How can I port forward over a VPN NAT?

    - by Charlie
    I have a multi-site VPN currently running with pfSense boxes and currently using OpenVPN. However I can change the OS and VPN type if need be. The main router has a 10.13.0.0/16 subnet and a series of public IPs For example, a branch has a 10.12.1.0/24 subnet How can I port forward NAT traffic on a public IP of the main router to a server behind the NAT of the second? So for instance port 95 on a public IP assigned to the main router forwards to 10.12.1.102 on the other router. Is this even possible? Currently my setup works great but only for intertnal traffic

    Read the article

  • Ping6 fail on linux

    - by michelemarcon
    I have 2 linux box configured with IPv4. I have tried adding IPv6 to them. I have issued this commands on box1: ip -6 addr add fd32:2d7f:f3c1::1/48 dev eth0 And I get this: inet6 addr: fd32:2d7f:f3c1::1/48 Scope:Global Then I have issued this command on box2: ip -6 addr add fd32:2d7f:f3c2::1/48 dev eth0 Back on box1 (command/response): ping6 fd32:2d7f:f3c1::1 is alive! ping6 fd32:2d7f:f3c2::1 ping6: sendto: Network is unreachable Why doesn't box1 ping box2 (of course, also box2 can't ping box1)?

    Read the article

  • lenovo x1 carbon windows 8 frequent wifi disconnect issue

    - by hIpPy
    I'm having frequent wifi disconnects on my Lenovo X1 Carbon Touch laptop. I got this laptop 2 months back and it has been happening ever since about 3-5 times a day and 10 times a week on average. I've Frontier Fios internet. Power connected or not does not matter. Once I get disconnected, I try below to connect again in that order: turn Airplane mode on and off, troubleshoot network problems windows troubleshooter), restart the laptop I'd find that the WiFi adapter would get disabled and sometimes windows troubleshooting would help but more than often I'd end up restarting the laptop. A week back, I upgraded my wifi network adapter drivers (now Intel, version 15.5.6.48, 10/3/2012). I still get disconnected frequently but turning Airplane mode on and off gets me connected again. So the driver update did help. Windows 8 is updated. None of the other devices (nexus, iphone phones, nexus7, ipad tablets) would have wifi issues when my laptop would get disconnected. config: Intel(R) Centrino(R) Advanced-N 6205 (WiFi network adapter) Microsoft Windows 8 Pro Microsoft Windows [Version 6.2.9200] x64-based PC LENOVO System Model: 3443CTO X1 Carbon Touch I recently noticed this log message When I got disconnected in event viewer: Your computer was not assigned an address from the network (by the DHCP Server) for the Network Card with network address 0x[XXXXXXXXXXXX]. The following error occurred: 0x79. Your computer will continue to try and obtain an address on its own from the network address (DHCP) server. Any idea?

    Read the article

  • Prevent Linux from processing incoming ICMP Host unreachable packets

    - by bbc
    I have a test setup with one host on a network (10.1.0.0/16) talking via TCP to another one on another network (10.2.0.0/16) and a gateway in the middle. Sometimes, the TCP connection is lost and while scanning the trace (pcap), I looks like it's because of just one ICMP Host unreachable message sent by the gateway to 10.1.0.1 at some point. 10.1.0.1 then sends a TCP RST to 10.2.0.1. In my opinion, the gateway (pfSense) is broken or not configured correctly but anyway, for testing purposes, I'd like to block this kind of ICMP on the host (10.1.0.1) before it has an influence on my TCP connection (or does it? I'm not even sure). I've tried iptables: iptables -I INPUT -i eth0 -p icmp --icmp-type host-unreachable -j DROP but while it does a good job at preventing userpace applications like ping from receiving these ICMP messages, my TCP connection still comes to an end when the alleged "killer ICMP packet" is sent by the gateway. Am I right about how it is processed? If yes, then what can I do to achieve my goal?

    Read the article

  • Can't ping static IP from internal network, only from outside

    - by Mike
    I'm running ubuntu and I have apache running, however, I can't ping internally to my static IP nor browse http://207.40.XXX.XX the web server using my static IP. I can only ping/browse localhost, 127.0.0.1, and 192.168.0.120 OR 207.40.XXX.XX only from the outside world. # cat /etc/hosts 127.0.0.1 localhost 127.0.1.1 my-server.myhost.com my-server # hostname my-server # netstat -tapn tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:80 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN - tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:631 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN - tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:29754 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN - tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:443 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN - tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:3306 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN Any ideas why this is not working?

    Read the article

  • KVM virtual machine unable to access internet

    - by peachykeen
    I have KVM set up to run a virtual machine (Windows Home Server 2011 acting as a build agent) on a dedicated server (CentOS 6.3). Recently, I ran updates on the host, and the virtual machine is now unable to connect to the internet. The virtual network is running through NAT, the host has an interface (eth0:0) set up with a static IP (virt-manager shows the network and its IP correctly), and all connections to that IP should be sent to the guest. The host and guest can ping one another, but the guest cannot ping anything above the host, nor can I ping the guest from anywhere else (I can ping the host). Results from the guest to another server under my control and from an external system to the guest both return "Destination port unreachable". Running tcpdump on the host and destination shows the host replying to the ping, but the destination never sees it (it doesn't even look like the host is bothering to send it on at all, which leads me to suspect iptables). The ping output matches that, listing replies from 192.168.100.1. The guest can resolve DNS, however, which I find rather odd. The guest's network settings (connection TCP/IPv4 properties) are set up with a static local IP (192.168.100.128), mask of 255.255.255.0, and gateway and DNS at 192.168.100.1. When originally setting up the vm/net, I had set up some iptables rules to enable bridging, but after my hosting company complained about the bridge, I set up a new virtual net using NAT and believe I removed all the rules. The VM's network was working perfectly fine for the last few months, until yesterday. I haven't heard anything from the hosting company, didn't change anything on the guest, so as far as I know, nothing else has changed (unfortunately the list of packages updated has since fallen off scrollback and I didn't note it down).

    Read the article

  • Internal Linux machine with Apache that I can access by IP address but not computer name

    - by Parris
    I have an Ubuntu machine running LAMP. While on the machine I can type localhost or the computers name to access htdocs. From another machine I can only access the machine via its IP Address. This just started happening recently when someone rearranged the network cables and removed a hub sitting between the machine and the network, which makes me think it wasn't all the stable to begin with anyways. Any suggestions on where I should start looking?

    Read the article

  • VPN IPsec site 2 site and static routing

    - by Giacomo
    Hello everybody experts! My question is pretty simple, but I can't figure it out because I'm pretty noob with these network stuffs. I have a vpn IPsec site2site between 2 lan with different ip classes, LAN A is class C and LAN B is class A. The vpn presents the LAN A to LAN B with the 10.178.51.64/27 segment. The problem is that when I start the vpn connection I cant Ping any 10.174.0.0/24 address(LAN B remote segment) from my LAN A; I think I need some kind of static route. Could u help me out pls? Thx Regards

    Read the article

  • Any ideas why Ettercap filters aren't seeing packet data?

    - by Bryan
    I'm using an Ettercap filter to detect a query response coming back from a particular service on a remote machine. When I see a response from the service, I'm searching through the data in the packet to see if an offset is a specific value, and if so I'm changing the value at another offset. Trouble is, when I try this on a new virtual machine I built my Ettercap filter's no longer getting any data in the DATA.data variable available to it. if(ip.proto == TCP && tcp.src == 17867) { msg("Response seen!\n"); if(DATA.data + 2 == "\0x01") { msg("Flag detected!\n"); DATA.data + 5 = 0x09; } } The filter's getting applied to the traffic because "Response seen!" messages get printed out by Ettercap. However, "Flag detected!" messages do not. I think DATA.data is indeed empty because if I change my second "if" statement to check for DATA.data == "" then the "Flag detected!" message gets printed. Any ideas why this may be happening?! Also, if this is the wrong site to be asking questions like this, please let me know. I wasn't sure if it fit better here or somewhere like superuser or serverfault. By the way, this is a cross-post from StackOverflow... I should have posted on this forum instead I think. :)

    Read the article

  • Network with bridge and port forwarding?

    - by rafek
    Hi! Below is my current (and planned) home network configuration. I would like to connect my non-wifi-capable desktop to my home network. The question is: HOW? What device do I need? The primary requiremen is that I need to be able to forward ports to my desktop. How would I achieve this? Is there something like "double port forwarding"? Could anyone please explain this configuration to me? Thank you in advance!

    Read the article

  • "Network is unreachable" When pinging google, can connect to internal computers on debian VM

    - by musher
    Similar to this SU question: "Network is unreachable" when attempting to ping google, but internal addresses work Actually, it's pretty much the same base issue. I went through that thread trying to find a solution, I changed my resolv.conf: before: domain [my work domain] search [my work domain] nameserver [my gateway] nameserver [my gateway2] I changed it to: after: domain [my work domain] search [my work domain] nameserver 8.8.8.8 nameserver 8.8.4.4 However, any time I reboot the computer the resolv.conf gets overwritten to the previous version (the 'before' above). The issues began after I installed virtualbox additions, X server and (specifically) LXDE: Cat of apt history.log: Start-Date: 2014-08-21 10:03:42 Commandline: apt-get install virtualbox-guest-utils virtualbox-guest-dkms Install: x11-xkb-utils:amd64 (7.7+1, automatic), libxaw7:amd64 (1.0.12-2, automatic), xfonts-utils:$ End-Date: 2014-08-21 10:03:56 Start-Date: 2014-08-21 10:18:39 Commandline: apt-get install lxde Install: desktop-base:amd64 (7.0.3, automatic), libgoa-1.0-0b:amd64 (3.12.4-1, automatic), lxmenu-d$ End-Date: 2014-08-21 10:21:52 Start-Date: 2014-08-21 10:26:40 Commandline: apt-get upgrade Upgrade: libio-socket-ssl-perl:am ifconfig on the guest: root@Peridot:~# ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 08:00:27:89:c9:20 og inet addr:172.31.2.102 Bcast:172.31.2.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::a00:27ff:fe89:c920/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:2281 errors:0 dropped:1 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:463 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:266507 (260.2 KiB) TX bytes:120554 (117.7 KiB) lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:65536 Metric:1 RX packets:4 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:4 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:240 (240.0 B) TX bytes:240 (240.0 B) The adapter in VBox is a bridged adapter directly onto my ethernet connection; as are my other 2 VMs (which work) Other SU questions I've tried: "connect: Network is unreachable" in VirtualBox VM

    Read the article

  • Conflicting ip routes with local table on attaching a virtual network interface

    - by user1071840
    I have an EC2 instance with these ip rules: $ sudo ip rule show 0: from all lookup local 32766: from all lookup main 32767: from all lookup default I can attach an elastic network interface to it with a private IP. Say the IP of my machine is 10.1.3.12 and the IP of the interface is 10.1.1.190. As soon as I attach the interface to my machine a new entry is added to the routing policy and local routing table: sudo ip rule show 0: from all lookup local 32765: from 10.1.1.190 lookup 10003 32766: from all lookup main 32767: from all lookup default $ sudo ip route show table local broadcast 10.1.1.0 dev eth3 proto kernel scope link src 10.1.1.190 local 10.1.1.190 dev eth3 proto kernel scope host src 10.1.1.190 broadcast 10.1.1.255 dev eth3 proto kernel scope link src 10.1.1.190 broadcast 10.1.3.0 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 10.1.3.12 local 10.1.3.12 dev eth0 proto kernel scope host src 10.1.3.12 broadcast 10.1.3.255 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 10.1.3.12 broadcast 127.0.0.0 dev lo proto kernel scope link src 127.0.0.1 local 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo proto kernel scope host src 127.0.0.1 local 127.0.0.1 dev lo proto kernel scope host src 127.0.0.1 broadcast 127.255.255.255 dev lo proto kernel scope link src 127.0.0.1 I can send traffic to this ENI directly from a host that can have the same IP as the host the ENI is attached to. This is where the problem starts. I ran tcpdump on the port in question and saw multiple SYNs going to the ENI with src '10.1.3.12' and destination '10.1.1.190' but didn't see even a single ACK. In my understanding if ACKs were being sent from the ENI they'd have destination as 10.1.3.12 i.e. the same as the local machine's IP and such packets will now be routed as local packets matching local routing policy: local 10.1.3.12 dev eth0 proto kernel scope host src 10.1.3.12 I'd like to send all the packets originating from 10.1.1.190 (my ENI) to go back on the same interface i.e. eth3 in this case. Contents of the nee table 10003 are: $ sudo ip route show table 10003 default via 10.1.1.1 dev eth3 I think I can do the following: I don't know if its possible but probably decrease the priority of local table so the packets match the table 10003. Use iptables to mangle these packets and update the local table route to include the mark information But I'm not sure if these are the right approaches.

    Read the article

  • is it possible in this case to get two IPv6 networks to communicate over the IPv4 Internet?

    - by user239167
    I have a setup of a laptop connected to a cellular IPv4 network (3G usb dongle) and PC connected to another IPv4/IPv6 network. Both have been configured to run as IPv6 routers and each has its IPv6 network. The laptop connects to the Internet via the 3G network with IPv4 address (private one and it is mostly changing) on one interface and has the other interface on AP mode providing its own private IPv6 network (2001:db8:444::/64). The PC connects to the Internet via the organization network with both public IPv4 and IPv6 addresses on one interface and has the other interface on AP mode providing its own private IPv6 network (2001:db8:222::/64). Both running Linux Ubuntu. Is it possible to get the two IPv6 network (2001:db8:222::/64 and 2001:db8:444::/64) to communicate over the IPv4 Internet? Is openvpn of any good in this case to get IPv6 traffic over IPv4-IPv4 tunnel? Thanks for helping in advance

    Read the article

  • Looking for easiest, most simple solution to run a customised DNS Server for my local network on Windows 7.

    - by Jamie G
    I need to forward some websites, such as http://testing.server/ to an fixed IP address on my local network. I can do this easily on one computer using the hosts file. However, I need this to work for all machines on my network. I think the best way to do this will be to setup my own DNS Servers and add the custom DNS settings there. However, I'm looking for the simplest way possible to do this - I really don't want to spend hours setting up Unix Servers and running tricky terminal based scripts just to do this! My server is a standard Windows 7 machine. My dream would be a nice simple windows program with a GUI where I could input my ISP's DNS server and it would use those records, unless I had specifically set up my own DNS for a domain to use instead. If it had a web based admin system that was accessible from another computer on the network that would be even better. Does anyone know of anything that can do this? Many thanks indeed.

    Read the article

  • Xen virtual host can reach some sites but not others

    - by Tun H S Lee
    Okay, this is killing me. Debian Squeeze, Xen 4.0, brand new install. No iptables rules whatsoever except for the ones added by the default xen bridge script. Dom0 can reach the entire world, no problems. DomU can receive packets from some hosts, but not from others. For instance, if I ping Host A, it works fine. If I ping Host B, the DomU reports 100% packet loss. The hosts are random, but consistent (even after reboots). I can see no pattern to why some work and others don't. In fact, in some cases, different virtual hosts on the same server (an other server at a different data center) are divided; some work and others do not. I can reboot (DomU or Dom0 too) and the same hosts will work or fail as before. If I tcpdump on the Host B while pinging from the DomU, everything looks fine. It sees the echo request coming in and says it's sending one back. However, if I tcpdump peth0 on the Dom0, it never sees the echo reply. Any ideas what could be happening? I'm tearing my hair out here.

    Read the article

  • Change TCP wait for ACK timeouts in Win7/WinServer

    - by maseth
    Is there any possibility to change default wait for ACK timeout in TCP network on Windows 7 or Windows Server ? I'm using very slow network ( 1200 bps ) and want to tweak TCP. When using default parameters network stuck on multiple retransmissions . If I'm able to change the ACK timeout and tx window size I think that it would work. On Windows XP it was possible but cant find any document for Win7 and Win Server.

    Read the article

  • Repeated requests on our server?

    - by pitty.platsch
    I encountered something strange in the access log of our Apache server which I cannot explain. Requests for webpages that I or my colleagues do from the office's Windows network get repeated by another IP (that we don't know) a couple of seconds later. The user agent repeating our requests is Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; InfoPath.2) Has anyone an idea? Update: I've got some more information now. The referrer of the replicate is set to the URL I requested before and it's not the exact same request as the protocol version is changed from 'HTTP/1.1' to 'HTTP/1.0'. The IP is not just one, it's just one of a subnet (80.40.134.*). It's just the first request to a resource that's get repeated, so it seems the "spy" is building up some kind of cache of visited places. The repeater is also picky. I tried randomly URLs with different HTTP status codes and different file patterns. 301s and 200s are redone, 404s not. Image extensions seem to be ignored. While doing my tests I discovered that this behavior seems to be common as I found other clients visiting just after the first requests: 66.249.73.184 - - [25/Oct/2012:10:51:33 +0100] "GET /foobar/ HTTP/1.1" 200 10952 "-" "Mediapartners-Google" 50.17.125.180 - - [25/Oct/2012:10:51:33 +0100] "GET /foobar/ HTTP/1.1" 200 41312 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; proximic; +http://www.proximic.com/info/spider.php)" I wasn't aware about this practice, so I don't see it that much as a threat anymore. I still want to find out who this is, so any further help is appreciated. I'll try later if this also happens if I query some other server where I have access to the access logs and will update here then.

    Read the article

  • Cross-platform automatic adhoc wifi?

    - by marienbad
    I'm not very knowledgeable about wifi, but I understand the notion of Adhoc networks (Wifi without a router), so... Is there a standard (or widely implemented) way of letting a device "momentarily" negotiate a wifi connection (Adhoc network or otherwise) directly to another device, transfer some data, and then quit, all without any user intervention on either device? For example, let's say I have a PC and an ereader in the same room and there's no nearby wifi router for either of these devices to connect to. I want to send a file from PC to ereader but I don't want to do the work of setting up network, selecting an SSID, or entering passwords. Is that possible?

    Read the article

  • windows: force user to use specific network adapter

    - by Chad
    I'm looking for a configuration/hack to force a particular application or all traffic from a particular user to use a specific NIC. I have an legacy client/server app that has a "security feature" that limits connections based on IP address. I'm trying to find a way to migrate this app to a terminal server environment. The simple solution is for the development team to update the code in the application, however in this case that's not an option. I was thinking I might be able to install VMware NIC's installed for each user on the terminal server and do some type of scripting to force that user account to use a specific NIC. Anybody have any ideas on this? EDIT 1: I think I have a hack to work around my specific problem, however I'd love to hear of a more elegant solution. I got lucky in that the software reads the server IP address out of a config file. So I'm going to have to make a config file for each user and make a customer programs files for each user. Then add a VMware NIC for each user and make each server IP address reside on a different subnet. That will force the traffic for a particular user to a particular IP address, however its really messy and all the VM NIC's will slow down the terminal server. I'll setup a proof of concept Monday and let the group know how it affects performance.

    Read the article

  • WinXP workgroup, 3 routers 3 computers

    - by Silvera
    I have 3 computers with WinXP x86, and 3 Cisco 1800 series routers. I'm trying to create a workgroup so that the 3 computers can share files with eachother. They can ping eachother (without any internet connection), and the routers setup is correctly configured (with interfaces, ip adresses, and ports). But none of the computers can see eachother, even though they are on the same network. My first question would be - can it be done the way it is currently configured - and, if yes, how, or can anyone point me in the right direction?

    Read the article

  • What are the different ways of remotely connecting to your computer?

    - by Rogue
    I'll be leaving for uni soon and would like to know the different methods of connecting remotely to my home pc. I know about VPN but are there any other ways? Also how secure is each of this method as I wouldn't want snoopers on my home-pc especially when I'm away. Also can i set up a remote connection to start and shut down my computer My operating system is windows, but if linux is more secure i would be willing to switch.

    Read the article

  • Set 802.1Q tagged port on VLAN1 on Dell PowerConnect switch

    - by Javier
    I'm having big troubles when adding this Dell switch to my network. Here we use several VLANs to segment traffic. All switches (3com and DLink mostly) have configured the same VLANs, most ports are 'untagged' and belong to a single VLAN, except for the ports used to join together the switches (in a star topology), these ports belong to all VLANs and use 802.1Q tags. So far, it works really well. But on this new switch (a Dell PowerConnect 5448), the settings are very different (and confusing). I have configured the same VLANs, an the uplink ports are set in 'general' mode (supposed to be fully 802.1Q compliant), I can set the VLAN membership as 'T' on these ports for all VLANs except VLAN 1. It always stay as 'U' on VLAN 1. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • XenServer 5.6.1-fp1. Can't get network working

    - by casey_miller
    I have a PC where XenServer 5.6.1 fp-1 has been successfully installed. I've manually set the network settings: 192.168.1.50 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.1 but it's set to xenbr0 iface. While eth0 is empty. When I click on "Configure Management Inteface" it shows that eth0 is connected. But when I ping a default gateway (which is 100% should be accessible) it fails. I used to another shell (Alt+F3) and logged as root. I also failed to ping. with both: ping -I eth0 192.168.1.1 and ping -I xenbr0 192.168.1.1 Be assured that: Cable works Ethernet adapter is 100% functional (prev OS was Ubuntu it was working) There is no firewall rule to deny anything. (everything is allowed) So the question is: What is a problem???

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226  | Next Page >