Search Results

Search found 2401 results on 97 pages for 'routing'.

Page 37/97 | < Previous Page | 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44  | Next Page >

  • Have servers behind OpenVPN subnet reach connecting clients

    - by imaginative
    I am trying to find some relevant documentation or what directives I need in either the OpenVPN server configuration or client configuration to accommodate for this use case. I have an OpenVPN server that clients connect to. The OpenVPN server can communicate directly with any of the clients already, this is not an issue. The client is able to reach any machine on the private subnet where OpenVPN resides, this is also not an issue. My issue is that the reverse is currently not possible - I have servers on the same subnet as the OpenVPN box that cannot reach any of the connecting clients. I'd like to be able to SSH to them and more, the same way the client can reach the servers behind the OpenVPN subnet. What do I need to do to make this possible? I already have masquerading rules set on the OpenVPN box: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.50.0/24 -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE IP Forwarding is enabled: echo 1 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward I added a route on the server behind the private subnet to be aware of the route: 192.168.50.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Network topology for both direct and routed traffic between two nodes

    - by IndigoFire
    Despite it's small size, this is the most difficult network design problem I've faced. There are three nodes in this network: PC running Windows XP with an internal WiFi adapter.Base station with both WiFi and a Wireless Modem (WiModem)Mobile device with both WiFi and WiModem The modem is a low-bandwidth but high-reliability connection. We'd like to use WiFi for high-bandwidth stuff like file transfers when the mobile is nearby, and the modem for control information. Here's the tricky part: we'd like the wifi traffic to go directly from the mobile to the PC, as rebroadcasting packets on the same WiFi channel takes up double the bandwidth. We can do that with a manual configuration by giving the both the PC and the base station two IP addresses for their WiFi interfaces: one on a subnet shared with the mobile, and one on their own subnet. The routes on the PC are set up so that any traffic going to the mobile via WiModem goes through the secondary IP address so that return traffic from the mobile also goes through the WiModem. Here's what that looks like: PC WiFi 1: 192.168.2.10/24 WiFi 2: 192.168.3.10/24 Default route: 192.168.2.1 Base Station WiFi 1: 192.168.2.1/24 WiFi 2: 192.168.3.1/24 WiModem: 192.168.4.1/24 Mobile WiFi: 192.168.3.20/24 WiModem: 192.168.4.20/24 We'd like to move to having the base station automatically configure the mobile and PC, as the manual setup is problematic when you start having multiple mobiles and PCs. This means that the PC can only have 1 IP address and needs to be treated as being pretty simple. Is it possible to have a setup driven by DHCP on the base station that is efficient with bandwidth?

    Read the article

  • Remotedesktop to windows 2008 server with 2 nics

    - by The_Mo
    Hi I have 2 NICs on a Windows 2008 R2 Server. nic1 with ip address 192.168.2.1 with gatewaty 192.168.2.254 and nic2 with ip address 10.96.6.253 with no gateway. The windows 2008 server is connected to a router which is connnected to another router so if I want to connect to the windows 2008 server I use 192.168.0.31 because it is forwarded. If I use remote desktop to connect to that machine I use 192.168.0.31 and that works well, but the server has a seccond nic and I want to be able to connect with a remotedesktop to nic2. Any help appreciated! [server windows 2008 r2 192.168.2.1] -- [router 192.168.2.254/192.168.0.31] -- [my computer 192.168.0.13 gateway 192.168.0.254]

    Read the article

  • How to route traffic from one subnet through a specific SOCKS proxy in other subnet?

    - by Yegor Razumovsky
    Here is my network map: Internet | | Router (192.168.1.1) | | (192.168.1.100) (wireless) MacBook ( mac os x / windows 7 / ubuntu. It doesn't matter ) (192.168.2.1) (wired) | | TargetComputer (192.168.2.2) I want to route all traffic from TargetComputer 192.168.2.2 through socks proxy running on my macbook. On target computer i can only change IP settings ( ip address, subnetmask, gateway, dns ).

    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

  • Hopping a VPN Tunnel

    - by lellouch
    My central office and remote offices are connected to each other over site to site ipsec vpn. We use Fortigate firewalls and everything is working fine. On the other hand, only central office is also connected to another company's network over ipsec vpn as well. In this situation, everything is also fine and employees at the central office is able to reach the other company's resources without problem. Now i want the employees working on our remote office can reach the other company's network over central office without creating new vpn tunnels. http://imgur.com/ozrXfGv How can i do that? Thanks for your answers in advance.

    Read the article

  • Redirect all outgoing traffic on port 80 to a different IP on the same server

    - by Spacedust
    I have multiple IP addresses on the same server and I would like to redirect all outgoing traffic on port 80 to a different IP on the same server just no to use always main IP. Currently I'm using this: /sbin/iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j SNAT --to-source IP; and it works well, but it redirects everything and when I make backups over SSH backup it's failing. System: CentOS 5.8 64-bit

    Read the article

  • IPTABLES route, redirect, forwardc traffic

    - by Anthony
    I am trying to redirect traffic from one IP reached on a specific port to a website. For example I have two external ips, lets say 194.145.63.1 and 194.145.63.2 set on one network card as 194.145.63.1 - eth0 and 194.145.63.2 -eth0:1 mywebsite.com allows access only from 194.145.63.1 and I want to set my rules like if I hit http://194.145.63.2:8080 to open mywebsite.com trough 194.145.63.1. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Packets marked INVALID in FORWARD rule

    - by Raphink
    I have a firewall that has 3 IP aliases on 1 physical interface. Packets get dropped between these 3 interfaces (either ICMP, HTTP, or anything else). We tracked it down to these packets being marked INVALID in the FORWARD rule and dropped due to the this rule: chain FORWARD { policy DROP; # connection tracking mod state state INVALID LOG log-prefix 'INVALID FORWARD DROP: '; mod state state INVALID DROP; mod state state (ESTABLISHED RELATED) ACCEPT; } (That is, we see the INVALID FORWARD DROP logs in dmesg) What could be causing this?

    Read the article

  • Remote network traffic not passing through VPN

    - by John Virgolino
    We have the following topology: LAN A LAN B LAN C 10.14.0.0/16 <-VPN-> 10.18.0.0/16 --- SONICWALL <-VPN-> M0N0WALL --- 10.32.0.0/16 Traffic between LAN A and LAN B works perfectly. Traffic between LAN C and LAN B works perfectly. Traffic between LAN A and LAN C, not so much. LAN A's gateway has a route to LAN C that points to the Sonicwall. The Sonicwall has a route to LAN A pointing to the VPN gateway connecting LAN B to LAN A. Tracing packets on the Sonicwall shows the LAN C destined traffic to arrive on the Sonicwall, but it does not forward the traffic, it dies there. Traffic from LAN B gets forwarded. Tracing packets on the Sonicwall while sending traffic from LAN C destined for LAN A shows nothing. This tells me that the M0N0WALL is not forwarding traffic for the 10.14.0.0 network and the Sonicwall is not forwarding from 10.14.0.0. The SA on the Sonicwall terminates on the WAN ZONE and is defined to use an address group that incorporates both the 10.14.0.0 and 10.18.0.0 networks. The M0N0WALL is configured for the 10.18.0.0 network and I have tried with both a static route to 10.14.0.0 and without on the M0N0WALL. I tried manually adding the 10.14.0.0 network to the SA on the M0N0WALL, but that really aggravated it and the SA never came up, so I reverted. I have checked all the firewall rules to make sure nothing is blocked. All of the Sonicwall auto-added rules look right. Specs: Sonicwall TZ200, Enhanced OS M0N0WALL v1.32 I'm at a loss at this point. Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Share the same subnet between Internal network and VPN Clients

    - by Pascal
    I would like to set up a configuration where VPN clients connecting to my Forefront TMG can access all the resources of my Internal network without having the to use the option "Use default gateway on remote network" on the VPN's TCP/IP Ipv4 Advanced Settings. This is important to me, since they can use their own internet while accessing my network through VPN (the security implications of this are acceptable on my cenario) My Internal network runs on 10.50.75.x, and I set up Forefront TMG to relay the DHCP of my Internal network to the VPN clients, so they get IPs from the same range as the Internal network. This setup initially works, and the VPN clients use their own internet, and can access anything that is on the internal network. However, after a while, HTTP Proxy Traffic from the Internal network starts getting routed to the IP of the RRAS Dial In Interface, instead of the IP of the Internal's network gateway. When this happens, the HTTP Proxy starts getting denied for obvious reasons. My first question is: does this happen because Forefront TMG wasn't designed to handle a cenario that I described above, and it "loses itself"? My second question is: Is there any way to solve this problem, either through configuration or firewall policies? My third question is: If there's no way that it can work with the cenario above, is there another cenario that will solve my problem, and do what I'd like it to do properly? Below are my network routes: 1 => Local Host Access => Route => Local Host => All Networks 2 => VPN Clients to Internal Network => Route => VPN Clients => Internal 3 => Internet Access => NAT => Internal, Perimeter, VPN Clients => External 4 => Internal to Perimeter => Route => Internal, VPN Clients => Perimeter Tks!

    Read the article

  • NAT Policy Inbound Source Problem on SonicWall TZ-210 with Multiple DSL Lines

    - by HK1
    We recently added three more DSL connections to our SonicWall TZ-210. My NAT Policies work fine as long as I leave them set with an inbound interface of X1, which hosts our original DSL connection. However, I'd like to change some of the NAT Policies to use inbound source/interface X2, X3, X4 or Any. In my initial tests, when I change one of the policies to use an inbound interface of X2, that port forward policy does not work at all. Traffic never makes it to the internal destination. What could be the problem?

    Read the article

  • Linux as a router for public networks

    - by nixnotwin
    My ISP had given me a /30 network. Later, when I wanted more public ips, I requested for a /29 network. I was told to keep using my earlier /30 network on the interface which is facing ISP, and the newly given /29 network should be used on the other interface which connects to my NAT router and servers. This is what I got from the isp: WAN IP: 179.xxx.4.128/30 CUSTOMER IP : 179.xxx.4.130 ISP GATEWAY IP:179.xxx.4.129 SUBNET : 255.255.255.252 LAN IPS: 179.xxx.139.224/29 GATEWAY IP :179.xxx.139.225 SUBNET : 255.255.255.248 I have a Ubuntu pc which has two interfaces. So I am planning to do the following: eth0 will be given 179.xxx.4.130/30 gateway 179.xxx.4.129 eth1 will be given 179.xxx.139.225/29 And I will have the following in the /etc/sysctl.conf: net.ipv4.ip_forward=1 These will be iptables rules: iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT My clients which have the ips 179.xxx.139.226/29 and 179.xxx.139.227/29 will be made to use 179.xxx.139.225/29 as gateway. Will this configuration work for me? Any comments? If it works, what iptables rules can I use to have a bit of security? P.S. Both networks are non-private and there is no NATing.

    Read the article

  • A can ping B, B can ping C but A cant ping C. How do i connect A to C (ethernet)?

    - by user16654
    I have a computer at home with ip 192.168.221.xxx I have another computer at work that I can ping and it has 2 ip addresses: 192.168.1.xxx and 192.168.0.xxx. Those last 2 addresses have the same gateway ie 192.168.1.1 . The computer at work is connected to a hub. That hub also has an embedded device connected to it with address 192.168.0.xxx Now from my home computer I cannot ping this embedded device. How would I connect to it without changing the subnetwork it connects to? I can ping the embedded device from my work computer and I can ping the work computer from my home computer. So I am trying to connect to the embedded device from my home computer through my work computer. Port forwarding? how would I establish that on Ubuntu?

    Read the article

  • route to vpn based on destination

    - by inquam
    I have a VPN connection on a Windows 7 machine. It's set up to connect to a server in US. Is it possible, and if so how, to setup so that .com destinations uses the vpn interface and .se destinations uses the "normal" connection? Edit (clarification): This is for outbound connections. I.e. the machine conencts to a server on foo.com and uses the VPN and the machine connects to bar.se and uses the "normal" interface. Let's say foo.com has an IP filter that ensures users are located in USA, if I go through the VPN I get a US ip and everything is fine. But tif all traffic goes this way the bar.se server that has a IP filter ensuring users are in Sweden will complain. So I want to route the traffic depending on server location. US servers through VPN and others through the normal interface.

    Read the article

  • ip route add HOMEIP via SERVERIP disconnects me from ssh

    - by Arya
    I want to use a vpn connection on my Debian server but I get disconnected from ssh if I connect to the vpn. I thought by using the "ip route add" I can prevent getting disconnected from my server and it will continue to use the main connection for communication between my computer and the server, and the vpn for communication with other ips. This is the command I use ip route add PUBLICHOMEIP via PUBLICSERVERIP But I get disconnected after the "ip route add" command too. Am I making a mistake anywhere?

    Read the article

  • Ping reply not getting to LAN machines but getting in Linux router Gateway

    - by Kevin Parker
    I have configured Ubuntu 12.04 as Gateway machine.its having two interfaces eth0 with ip 192.168.122.39(Static) and eth1 connected to modem with ip address 192.168.2.3(through DHCP). ip-forwarding is enabled in router box. Client machine is configured as: ip address 192.168.122.5 and gateway 192.168.122.39 Client machines can ping router box(192.168.122.39).but when pinged 8.8.8.8 reply is not reaching Client machines but in the tcpdump output on gateway i can see echo request for 8.8.8.8 but never echo reply.Is this because of 122.5 not forwarding request to 2.0 network.Can u please help me in fixing this.

    Read the article

  • How do I route traffic to website using a spcified network connection on Windows 7

    - by rwetzeler
    I want to route all traffic to a website over my wireless connection while the rest of the traffic using my lan. What I tried was first finding out the IP address of the website I want to go to. For example, lets say pandora.com. I found it resolves to 208.85.40.20. I have entered that entry into my hosts file. I then added that route using route add 208.85.40.20 mask 255.255.255.255 WirelessIP. It doesn't seem to work however. Instead of using the IP address, is there a way that I can just say.. this URL to route over that connection? Does anyone know of a program that I can install that will do this.. possibly some sort of proxy or a software load balancer that can do this?

    Read the article

  • Are neighbors formed in EIGRP and OSPF always directly connectly?

    - by xczzhh
    I always thought that neighbors formed in EIGRP were not necessarily directly connected because the only requirement for two routers to be neighbors is that they share the same Autonomous System and K-values, but it seems that I was wrong. I have looked up several books, they do not seem to give a clear answer. And I am even more confused with OSPF... Please, give me some light here. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Linux router with diffent gateways for incomming and outgoing connections

    - by nkout
    I have the following topology: LAN Users:192.168.1.2 - 254 (192.168.1.0/24) gateway1: 192.168.2.2/24 used for all outgoing connections of LAN users (default gateway) gateway2: 192.168.3.2/24 used for incoming services (destination NAT, ports 80,443 are forwarded to 192.168.2.1) linux router-server R eth0 192.168.1.1/24: LAN eth1 192.168.2.1/24: WWAN1 eth2 192.168.3.1/24: WWAN2 I want to: route all outgoing traffic coming from LAN and R via 192.168.2.2 route the responses to incoming connections via 192.168.3.2 My config: ifconfig eth0 up 192.168.1.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 ifconfig eth1 up 192.168.2.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 ifconfig eth2 up 192.168.3.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 echo 0 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward route add default gw 192.168.2.2 iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -d !192.168.0.0/16 -j MASQUERADE I want to add iptables rule to mark incoming traffic from WWAN2 and send back the responses to WWAN2, while keeping default gateway on WWAN1

    Read the article

  • Python: how to calculate data received and send between two ipaddresses and ports [closed]

    - by ramdaz
    I guess it's socket programming. But I have never done socket programming expect for running the tutorial examples while learning Python. I need some more ideas to implement this. What I specifically need is to run a monitoring program of a server which will poll or listen to traffic being exchange from different IPs across different popular ports. For example, how do I get data received and sent through port 80 of 192.168.1.10 and 192.168.1.1 ( which is the gateway). I checked out a number of ready made tools like MRTG, Bwmon, Ntop etc but since we are looking at doing some specific pattern studies, we need to do data capturing within the program. Idea is to monitor some popular ports and do a study of network traffic across some periods and compare them with some other data. We would like to figure a way to do all this with Python....

    Read the article

  • Access to a network server without port forwarding

    - by SdevDavid
    I have a network with the following structure. The server in PC2 is simple socket server TCP in 8080 port. I need to access to PC2 from other external network by socket client. This socket client knows the public IP (85.xxx.xxx.x), the private IP (192.168.0.21) and the port. How I can access PC2 without port forwarding on the router? If possible, I would like to have a reference in any programming language of this case.

    Read the article

  • Multiple network cards, controlling where my traffic goes

    - by thefinn93
    This is an Ubuntu 12.04 server install. I have multiple network cards, eth0 and eth1 lets call them. eth0 is connected to the internet, and all of my traffic goes through it, until eth1 gets plugged in. Then the machine tries to send everything through eth1, which for various and sundry reasons does not go out to the Interent. The only traffic it doesn't send through eth1 is traffic on eth0's subnet. It also will not accept inbound connections on eth0 from outside of eth0's subnet. I'd like all outbound traffic to go out eth0, but I'd like incoming connections from to either card from any subnet to work.

    Read the article

  • Where route to 169.254.0.0 comes from?

    - by jackhab
    Running CentOS 5.4 Why do I have route to 169.254.0.0 although it does not appear in Network Ethernet Device Route configuration dialog? Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth2 169.254.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth2 default 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth2 Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to configure OpenVPN server to use custom default gateway?

    - by Arenim
    I have a vpn server at address 10.1.0.2 and the server have another ip in it's network -- 10.0.0.2 in his subnet (it's a tun2socks router). But default server's gateway is NOT 10.0.0.2 (and it's ok) but another external IP. I want all the client's traffic to be forwarded through this ip address -- 10.0.0.2. Here is part of my server's config: dev tap0 server-bridge 10.1.0.1 255.255.255.0 10.1.0.50 10.1.0.100 push "route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0" ; now client can ping 10.0.0.2 push "redirect-gateway def1 bypass-dhcp" push "dhcp-option DNS 10.1.0.1" push "dhcp-option WINS 10.1.0.1" in fact i want some like push "redirect-gateway 10.0.0.2" How can I achieve this?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44  | Next Page >