Search Results

Search found 21678 results on 868 pages for 'network traffic'.

Page 373/868 | < Previous Page | 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380  | Next Page >

  • Persistent routes for DD-WRT PPTP VPN client

    - by Tim Kemp
    My home network in the USA is behind a Buffalo router (G300NH) running their version of DD-WRT. I use the built-in PPTP VPN client to connect to a VPN provider in the UK. I route certain traffic over the VPN (so it has a UK source address, for various entirely legal reasons) which I achieved by following the instructions in the DD-WRT docs and my VPN provider's own instructions. I placed two commands like this in the firewall script: route add -net xxx.xxx.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 dev ppp0 route add -net yyy.yyy.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 dev ppp0 I didn't put any of the iptables rules in since it my setup doesn't seem to need them. It works like a charm. Traffic to the xxx subnets goes over the VPN, everything else goes out over my ISPs own pipes. The problem comes when the VPN drops, which it does occasionally. DD-WRT does a fine job of reconnecting it automatically, but the routes are trashed every time that happens. How do I automate the process of re-establishing my routes? I thought about static routes, but the IP address of the VPN connection is dynamically assigned (which is why I'm using dev ppp0). Many thanks, Tim

    Read the article

  • IPSec Tunnel to Amazon EC2 - Netkey, NAT, and routing issue

    - by Ernest Mueller
    I'm working on getting an IPSec VPN working between Amazon EC2 and my on-premise. The goal is to be able to safely administer stuff, up/download data, etc. over that tunnel. I have gotten the tunnel up in openswan between a Fedora 12 instance with an elastic IP and a Cisco router that's also NATted. I think the ipsec part is OK, but I'm having trouble figuring out how to route traffic that way; there's no "ipsec0" virutal interface because on Amazon you have to use netkey and not KLIPS for the vpn. I hear iptables may be required and I'm an iptables noob. On the left (Amazon), I have a 10. network. Box 1 is privately 10.254.110.A, publically IP 184.73.168.B. Netkey tunnel is up. Box 2 is publically 130.164.26.C, privately 130.164.0.D And my .conf is: conn ni type= tunnel authby= secret left= 10.254.110.A leftid= 184.73.168.B leftnexthop= %defaultroute leftsubnet= 10.254.0.0/32 right= 130.164.26.C rightid= 130.164.0.D rightnexthop= %defaultroute rightsubnet= 130.164.0.0/18 keyexchange= ike pfs= no auto= start keyingtries= 3 disablearrivalcheck=no ikelifetime= 240m auth= esp compress= no keylife= 60m forceencaps= yes esp= 3des-md5 I added a route to box 1 (130.164.0.0/18 via 10.254.110.A dev eth0) but that doesn't do it for predictable reasons, when I traceroute the traffic's still going "around" and not through the vpn. Routing table: 10.254.110.0/23 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 10.254.110.A 130.164.0.0/18 via 10.254.110.178 dev eth0 src 10.254.110.A 169.254.0.0/16 dev eth0 scope link metric 1002 Anyone know how to do the routing with a netkey ipsec tunnel where both sides are NATted? Thanks...

    Read the article

  • Route through site-to-site VPN not working

    - by Jonathan
    I'm trying to set up a site-to-site VPN using RRAS on two 2K8r2 servers since yesterday. The connection is working at this point, but I can't get it to send traffic from one site to the other one. Set up: the set up is the same on both sites: the server is connected to a router that's connected to a modem. The routers act like a DHCP-server and assign IP addresses from the range subnet.21-subnet-.100. Both servers use a static IP address, subnet.11, and are set up as DMZ. Configuration: the servers are configured using the wizard to set up a site-to-site connection. This works with a demand-dial interface and a PPTP VPN connection. As mentioned, the VPN connection work properly. Problem: I can't get the servers to send the traffic for the other site, to be sent through the VPN connection. I added a static route on both server (home, office 1) and I can see the result in the IP routing table (home, office 1). I did this because the route didn't show up automatically. My guess is that this last step isn't right, for example because the routing table states "non demand-dial", which seems not correct. Home: Subnet: 10.0.1.0/24 Router: 10.0.1.1 Server: 10.0.1.11 (DMZ) DHCP: 10.0.1.21-10.0.1.100 RRAS DHCP: 10.0.1.101-10.0.1.150 Office 1: Subnet: 10.0.2.0/24 Router: 10.0.2.1 Server: 10.0.2.11 (DMZ) DHCP: 10.0.2.21-10.0.2.100 RRAS DHCP: 10.0.2.101-10.0.2.150 I hope someone has an idea to get this route working!

    Read the article

  • Same netmask or /32 for secondary IP on Linux

    - by derobert
    There appear to be (at least) two ways to add a secondary IP address to an interface on Linux. By secondary, I mean that it'll accept traffic to the IP address, and responses to connections made to that IP will use it as a source, but any traffic the box originates (e.g., an outgoing TCP connection) will not use the secondary address. Both ways start with adding the primary address, e.g., ip addr add 172.16.8.10/24 dev lan. Then I can add the secondary address with either a netmask of /24 (matching the primary) or /32. If I add it with a /24, it gets flagged secondary, so will not be used as the source of outgoing packets, but that leaves a risk of the two addresses being added in the wrong order by mistake. If I add it with /32, wrong order can't happen, but it doesn't get flagged as secondary, and I'm not sure what the bad effects of that may be. So, I'm wondering, which approach is least likely to break? (If it matters, the main service on this machine is MySQL, but it also runs NFSv3. I'm adding a second machine as a warm standby, and hope to switch between them by changing which owns the secondary IP.)

    Read the article

  • IP Phone over VPN - one way calls unless default route?

    - by dannymcc
    I have come across a strange problem with our VPN and BCM 50 (Nortel/Avaya) phone system. As you can tell by my other questions I have been doing some work on setting a VPN up from one location to another and it's all working well. With one exception. We have an IP phone that is connected at the remote location, straight to a router which has a VPN tunnel to our main practice. The phone works mostly, but every few calls it turns into a one way call. As in, the caller (from the remote phone) can't hear the receiver- but the receiver can hear the caller. This is fixed by setting the VPN tunnel to be the default route for all traffic. The problem with fixing it that way is that all traffic then goes through the tunnel which slows internet access etc. down considerably. The router is set to send the following over the VPN: 192.168.1.0/24 192.168.2.0/24 192.168.4.0/24 The IP of the remote location is: 192.168.3.0/24 The remote router (where the phone is) is a Draytek 2830n, and the local router (at the main practice) is a Draytek 2820. We are using an IPSec tunnel with AES encryption <- as a result of a previous answer pointing to the incompatibility in the hardware encryption. Any advice would be appreciated!

    Read the article

  • iptables secure squid proxy

    - by Lytithwyn
    I have a setup where my incoming internet connection feeds into a squid proxy/caching server, and from there into my local wireless router. On the wan side of the proxy server, I have eth0 with address 208.78.∗∗∗.∗∗∗ On the lan side of the proxy server, I have eth1 with address 192.168.2.1 Traffic from my lan gets forwarded through the proxy transparently to the internet via the following rules. Note that traffic from the squid server itself is also routed through the proxy/cache, and this is on purpose: # iptables forwarding iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -s 192.168.2.0/24 -m state --state NEW -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A POSTROUTING -t nat -j MASQUERADE # iptables for squid transparent proxy iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth1 -p tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to 192.168.2.1:3128 iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -j REDIRECT --to-port 3128 How can I set up iptables to block any connections made to my server from the outside, while not blocking anything initiated from the inside? I have tried doing: iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -s 192.168.2.0/24 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -j REJECT But this blocks everything. I have also tried reversing the order of those commands in case I got that part wrong, but that didn't help. I guess I don't fully understand everything about iptables. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Linux: prevent outgoing TCP flood

    - by Willem
    I run several hundred webservers behind loadbalancers, hosting many different sites with a plethora of applications (of which I have no control). About once every month, one of the sites gets hacked and a flood script is uploaded to attack some bank or political institution. In the past, these were always UDP floods which were effectively resolved by blocking outgoing UDP traffic on the individual webserver. Yesterday they started flooding a large US bank from our servers using many TCP connections to port 80. As these type of connections are perfectly valid for our applications, just blocking them is not an acceptable solution. I am considering the following alternatives. Which one would you recommend? Have you implemented these, and how? Limit on the webserver (iptables) outgoing TCP packets with source port != 80 Same but with queueing (tc) Rate limit outgoing traffic per user per server. Quite an administrative burden, as there are potentially 1000's of different users per application server. Maybe this: how can I limit per user bandwidth? Anything else? Naturally, I'm also looking into ways to minimize the chance of hackers getting into one of our hosted sites, but as that mechanism will never be 100% waterproof, I want to severely limit the impact of an intrusion. Cheers!

    Read the article

  • Centos iptables configuration for Wordpress and Gmail smtp

    - by Fabrizio
    Let me start off by saying that I'm a Centos newby, so all info, links and suggestions are very welcome! I recently set up a hosted server with Centos 6 and configured it as a webserver. The websites running on it are nothing special, just some low traffic projects. I tried to configure the server as default as possible, but I like it to be secure as well (no ftp, custom ssh port). Getting my Wordpress to run as desired, I'm running into some connection problems. 2 things are not working: installing plugins and updates through ssh2 (failed to connect to localhost:sshportnumber) sending emails from my site using the Gmail smtp (Failed to connect to server: Permission denied (13)) I have the feeling that these are both related to the iptables configuration, because I've tried everything else (I think). I tried opening up the firewall to accept traffic for ports 465 (gmail smtp) and ssh port (lets say this port is 8000), but both the issues remain. Ssh connections from the terminal are working fine though. After each change I tried implementing I restarted the iptables service. This is my iptables configuration (using vim): # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.7 on Sun Jun 1 13:20:20 2014 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0] -A INPUT -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p icmp -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8000 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 465 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited -A FORWARD -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited -A OUTPUT -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -o lo -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8000 -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 465 -j ACCEPT COMMIT # Completed on Sun Jun 1 13:20:20 2014 Are there any (obvious) issues with my iptables setup considering the above mentioned issues? Saying that the firewall is doing exactly nothing in this state is also an answer... And again, if you have any other suggestions for me to increase security (considering the basic things I do with this box), I would love hear it, also the obvious ones! Thanks!

    Read the article

  • My home box as my own host?

    - by Majid
    Hi all, I have a 512 kb/s DSL service at home. I do not have a static IP but I can get one if I pay some extra to my ISP. Now, if I get the static IP, can I make my home box act as my internet host? What else do I need? Thanks P.S. I know that if at all possible, the site I make available this way might be slow, that is alright, my question is if it is possible at all. Edit: I need this for very small traffic. I am a php developer and for my projects I am often asked to provide a demo. I currently use a free hosting for this purpose but it is down most of the time and support is non-existent. So I thought to set-up my home computer as my test server. With this please note that: I will only occasionally have 'visitors' and that will be one or possibly two visitors at any time. These demos, are to showcase functionality, so no big images are served and page views will normally generate under 100KB of traffic.

    Read the article

  • How do you get AWS VPC EC2 instances to be able to see the AWS APIs?

    - by Peter Mounce
    We're spinning up infrastructure inside of an AWS VPC via CloudFormation. We're using auto-scaling groups to bring up VPC-EC2 instances (so, we don't bring up instances directly; ASGs manage that). Inside of a PVC, EC2 instances only have a private IP; they cannot see the outside world without further work. When these instances spin up, we have some bootstrap tasks that require talking to the various AWS APIs. We also have some ongoing tasks that require AWS API traffic. How are you tackling this apparent chicken-egg problem? We've read about: NAT instances - but don't like this so much because it's another layer to our stack. assigning elastic-IPs to each VPC instance that needs to talk - but a) they all do, and b) since we're using ASGs, we don't know which instances to assign EIPs to at provision-time, and c) we'd need to set up something to monitor those ASGs and assign EIPs when instances are terminated and replaced spinning up an instance (actually, a load-balanced pair, probably spanning AZs) to act as an AWS-API proxy for all API traffic I guess I'm wondering whether there's some kind of back-door we can open that allows our VPC EC2 instances access to the AWS API endpoints, but nothing else, for cheap-complexity setup, that doesn't add another network-hop layer to our infrastructure for serving requests.

    Read the article

  • Could local ISP capture my location whenever i launch a VPN to a VPN server?

    - by Ozgun Sunal
    I am extremely concerned that my ISP collects any information once I am connected to a VPN server. For instance, as far as I know, when I start a connection to a HotSpotShield VPN server, an IP address is assigned to me just before a successful connection. Besides, I'll be having an extra IP address at the beginning with the TAP Adapter. An encryption tunnel is set up between me and the VPN server. Whenever my request for a website reaches them (VPN server), they decrypt the data and later they encrypt the reply which returns from the web (targeted) server. This works like that. So, the ISP can not see what I am watching, displaying and writing because the connection is encrypted. But, the targeted websites see and record all actions. Still, they can not identify my real IP address. I'm really concerned about if the ISP can see "my location". OK, it has an IP address from another country as my real IP address, but how does my ISP detect the traffic going through them? Can they find out who I am? Won't they say "Hey, there is a traffic but who is and what he is doing right now?", because I get the Internet from them?

    Read the article

  • Netbook (Samsung N220) on Ubuntu 10.04 slows down WiFi for other computers

    - by Joachim
    I encountered a really odd problem with my new netbook. I am running Ubuntu 10.04 on a Samsung N220 Mito. So far everything worked fine. Now I tried the machine for the first time in our work group where we have a wifi (with internet access) for all laptops. The wifi is controlled by a computer running Suse 9.3 which provides a DHCP server and imposes a firewall. At the moment there is only a macbook in the wifi, where no problems with the internet or wifi connection are encountered. Now coming to my actual problem: In addition to the macbook i connect the Samsung N220 to the Wifi. Problem: My download speed is for some reason limited to 70KB/s max. This is neither a limitation of the server/website i browse on, nor a configuration of the netbook: at home i have 500KB/s download speeds. Furthermore, it is not a default limitation for "untrusted" or "new machines" in the wifi, as for instance other new laptops get full speed internet with our wifi. Problem: Once the Samsung N220 is generating traffic in the wifi, the wifi is slowed down dramatically for all other machines: I run a ping to the router from the macbook. The ping times with the N220 ideling are 2-6ms. When I start downloading or browsing in the web with the N220 the ping speed drops to 800ms. Vice versa, when the macbook is generating the traffic the ping of the N220 to the rooter stays constant at around 2-6ms. So clearly, it is some problem originating from my netbook or maybe its treatment in the wifi. Thanks for any help

    Read the article

  • Load Balancing Rails on Apache 2.x

    - by revgum
    My situation is that I need to proxy traffic to the root of my web server to port 81 for IIS, and then any traffic to a sub-directory needs to be directed to the rails app. my-server.com/ - needs to proxy to port 81 my-server.com/myapp - needs to point to the rails app This seems to be working alright for the rails application but the images, javascripts, and stylesheets are not actually working (proxied). I've tried to fiddle with the proxypass lines but it still doesn't work for me..can anyone help? Here's my complete VirtualHost portion of the config; LoadModule proxy_module modules/mod_proxy.so LoadModule proxy_http_module modules/mod_proxy_http.so ProxyRequests off <Proxy balancer://myapp_cluster> BalancerMember http://127.0.0.1:3001 BalancerMember http://127.0.0.1:3002 </Proxy> <VirtualHost *:80> DocumentRoot "c:\ruby\apps\myapp\public" <Directory /myapp > Options FollowSymLinks AllowOverride None </Directory> ProxyPass /myapp/images ! ProxyPass /myapp/stylesheets ! ProxyPass /myapp/javascripts ! ProxyPass /myapp/ balancer://myapp_cluster/ ProxyPassReverse /myapp/ balancer://myapp_cluster/ ProxyPreserveHost on ProxyPass / http://localhost:81/ ErrorLog "c:\ruby\apps\myapp\log\error.log" # Possible values include: debug, info, notice, warn, error, crit, # alert, emerg. LogLevel warn CustomLog "c:\ruby\apps\myapp\log\access.log" combined </VirtualHost>

    Read the article

  • Can't route specific subnet thru VPN in ubuntu

    - by Disco
    I'm having issues routing traffic thru VPN. Here's my setup I have 3 hosts, let's call them A, B and Z B and Z have a VPN connection in the 10.10.10.x SUBNET A and B have a direct connection in the 10.10.12.x SUBNET I want to be able to route traffic from A to Z, like : A <= 10.10.12.254 [LAN] 10.10.12.111 => B <= 10.10.10.152 [VPN] 10.10.10.10 => Z On host B, i have set up ip_forwarding : net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1 and routing on host B: [root@hostA: ~]# ip route 10.10.10.10 dev ppp0 proto kernel scope link src 10.10.10.152 10.10.12.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 10.10.12.111 10.10.10.0/24 dev ppp0 scope link 169.254.0.0/16 dev eth1 scope link routing on host A: [root@hostA: ~]# ip route 10.10.10.0 via 10.10.12.111 dev eth1 10.10.12.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 10.10.12.254 169.254.0.0/16 dev eth1 scope link default via 192.168.1.1 dev eth0 But still not able to ping 10.10.10.10 from host A. Any idea ? I'm pulling my hairs out.

    Read the article

  • How to set up a easy-to-use proxy for the whole system with WinXP client and server?

    - by Pekka
    I am working together intensively with a colleague on the Canary Islands. We speak through live messenger and work together using a RDP software. She has frequent problems with connections to certain big-name and small-name sites (amongst others live.com, google.com, gmx.de) very likely to be caused by the spanish provider (the connections simply time out, this has been going on for weeks already). I have been thinking about setting up my computer as a proxy to make these connections work. I have a DSL connection and am behind a NAT capable router that I control. Does anybody know a simple, "one-click" way to transport ALL network traffic through a remote proxy? Without having to set proxy settings for each application that uses the internet? VPN is not an option, because I am behind a firewall that supports protocol 47 and such, but I have never succeeded in getting an incoming VPN connection to work. I can however redirect normal traffic using NAT. A VPN solution that does not need strange protocols would also be an option.

    Read the article

  • How to place a virtual machine in DMZ?

    - by Giordano
    I have an Ubuntu 12.04 server running few virtual machines with KVM. I would like to expose some of these virtual machines on the internet, to make it possible for customers to test the products we're developing and make available other products for demo purposes. One of the server NICs is configured with a public IP. However before exposing anything on the web I would like to be sure that if one of the virtual machines get compromised, the attacker doesn't reach the rest of the hosts. What I would like to do is to put these virtual machines into a DMZ. These are the steps I'm planning to do: Create a tap interface in the virtualization host (let's say tap1) Create a bridge using tap1 and give it an IP in a subnet separate from the other hosts. Let's say 10.0.0.1 Attach the DMZ virtual machines to the bridge and configure their IP statically (10.0.0.2, 10.0.0.3, etc...) Using UFW, forbid any traffic from 10.0.0.0/24 to any of the internal hosts, allow the traffic from the internal hosts towards 10.0.0.0/24 and expose the virtual machines on the web using port forwarding. Do you think this setup is safe? Can you suggest any improvement or a better/safer approach? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • High latency due to non-presence of a transit provider in my country

    - by nixnotwin
    My ISP, a state owned incumbent, buys bandwidth from different transit providers. Whenever it buys transits it announces only a specific prefix (in most cases a hitherto unused) through the new transit AS. For e.g. if it runs out of bandwidth, it buys bandwidth from a new transit and announces a new prefix through it, while the same prefix is not announced (or announced with lowest metrics, so that the routes are very rarely used) via the old transits which continue to provide bandwidth to it. I am a business customer, so I have a fiber based link to the ISP and a tiny subnet is given to me. The subnet which is provide to me is part of a prefix which is announced by the AS of a transit who, it seems, do not have a presence in my country. So when I do a trace the packets, when they leave my ISP's AS, they take about 275ms to reach the transit providers core router, which is located in USA (half the world away). Also for upstream traffic my ISP uses a transit provider (tier 1) who has a presence in my country. But the return path is always through the transit which is in USA. So, average latency is 400ms. All the users of other ISPs in my country discover my subnet via USA. Even the traffic from neighboring countries, from Europe (which is much nearer) follows the path via USA. Sites using CDNs also resolve to ips in USA. I have informed the ISP NOC about the issue and I have asked them to provide an ip subnet belonging to a prefix announced by a local transit (preferably a tier 1 transit provider) and I am waiting for a reply. My question: Is it a serious issue that I must follow up to get it resolved? When I compared the latency on other providers in my country, it is, in most cases, less than half of my ISPs latency. Why my ISP doesn't announce all its prefixes to all of its transit providers, so that the packets can take efficient and nearest routes to reach prefixes that originate within its network?

    Read the article

  • I need a reverse proxy solution for SSH

    - by Bond
    Hi here is a situation I have a server in a corporate data center for a project. I have an SSH access to this machine at port 22.There are some virtual machines running on this server and then at the back of every thing many other Operating systems are working. Now Since I am behind the data centers firewall my supervisor asked me if I can do some thing by which I can give many people on Internet access to these virtual machines directly. I know if I were allowed to get traffic on port other than 22 then I can do a port forwarding. But since I am not allowed this so what can be a solution in this case. The people who would like to connect might be complete idiots.Who may be happy just by opening putty at their machines or may be even filezilla.I have configured an Apache Reverse Proxy for redirecting the Internet traffic to the virtual machines on these hosts.But I am not clear as for SSH what can I do.So is there some thing equivalent to an Apache Reverse Proxy which can do similar work for SSH in this situation. I do not have firewall in my hands or any port other than 22 open and in fact even if I request they wont allow to open.2 times SSH is not some thing that my supervisor wants.

    Read the article

  • IPTables Rule for Google Apps SMTP

    - by XpresServers
    I am trying to add iptables rule to allow traffic on ports 465 & 587 to google apps smtp servers. But I got not luck. My WHMCS installation works fine with google apps when I turn off iptables but iptables turn on itself again and email stop working. Please add rules to allow traffic from port 465 and 587. Following are my IPTables rules grabbed from /etc/sysconfig/iptables # Generated by iptables-save v1.3.5 on Fri Oct 5 01:33:52 2012 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [2191:434537] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [2390:987151] :acctboth - [0:0] -A INPUT -j acctboth -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --gid-owner mailman -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --gid-owner mail -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -d 127.0.0.1 -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --uid-owner cpanel -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --uid-owner root -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -j acctboth -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --sport 587 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --sport 465 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT <<IN THIS SPACE RULES ARE RELATED TO SPECIFIC IPS ONLY>> -A acctboth -i ! lo COMMIT # Completed on Fri Oct 5 01:33:52 2012 # Generated by iptables-save v1.3.5 on Fri Oct 5 01:33:52 2012 *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [196:12398] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [191:15070] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [190:15010] -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --gid-owner mailman -j RETURN -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --gid-owner mail -j RETURN -A OUTPUT -d 127.0.0.1 -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --uid-owner cpanel -j RETURN -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --uid-owner root -j RETURN -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -j REDIRECT COMMIT # Completed on Fri Oct 5 01:33:52 2012 Thanks Hassan

    Read the article

  • Juniper SSG20 IP settings for email server

    - by codemonkie
    We have 5 usable external static IP addresses leased by our ISP: .49 to .53, where .49 is assigned to the Juniper SSG20 firewall and NATed for 172.16.10.0/24 .50 is assigned to a windows box for web server and domain controller .51 is assigned to another windows box with exchange server (domain: mycompany1.com) mx record is pointing to 20x.xx.xxx.51 Currently there is a policy set for all SMTP incoming traffic addressed to .51 forward to the NATed address of the exchange server box (private IP: 172.16.10.194). We can send and receive emails for both internal and external, but the gmail is saying mails from mycomany1.com is not sent from the same IP as the mx lookup however is from 20x.xx.xxx.49: Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 20x.xx.xxx.49 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of [email protected]) client-ip=20x.xx.xxx.49; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 20x.xx.xxx.49 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of [email protected]) [email protected] and the mx record in global dns space as well as in the domain controller .50 for mail.mycompany1.com is set to 20x.xx.xxx.51 My attempt to resolve the above issue is to Update the mx record from 20x.xx.xxx.51 to 20x.xx.xxx.49 Create a new VIP for SMTP traffic addressed to 20x.xx.xxx.49 to forward to 172.16.10.194 After my changes incoming email stopped working, I believe it has something to do with the Juniper setting that SMTP addressed to .49 is not forwarded to 172.16.10.194 Also, I have been wondering is it mandatory to assign an external static IP address to the Juniper firewall? Any helps appreciated. TIA

    Read the article

  • esx5 debian VM vlan setup

    - by Kstro21
    i have a server with ESX5, have a switch with about 20 vlans, this is how setup the trunk port interface GigabitEthernet0/1/1 description ToOper port link-type trunk undo port trunk allow-pass vlan 1 port trunk allow-pass vlan 2 to 14 stp disable ntdp enable ndp enable bpdu enable then, i created a standar switch(sw1) using the vSphere Client, the VLAN ID is set to All (4095), i also created a VM with Debian 6, with a NIC connected to sw1, now, i want to configure this NIC for a selected group of vlans auto vlan10 iface vlan10 inet static address 11.10.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.224 mtu 1500 vlan_raw_device eth0 auto vlan14 iface vlan14 inet static address 11.10.1.65 netmask 255.255.255.248 mtu 1500 vlan_raw_device eth0 so, when i restart the network using /etc/init.d/networking restart, i got this error Reconfiguring network interfaces...SIOCSIFADDR: No such device vlan14: ERROR while getting interface flags: No such device SIOCSIFNETMASK: No such device SIOCSIFBRDADDR: No such device vlan14: ERROR while getting interface flags: No such device SIOCSIFMTU: No such device vlan14: ERROR while getting interface flags: No such device Failed to bring up vlan14. done. this is just part of the error, so, my questions is: is this possible?, i mean, what i'm trying to achieve using ESX Virtual Machines, VLANS, etc is this a Debian problem? can be solved? i've read about a file named z25_persistent-net.rules in Debian but it doesn't exist in my installation. in the In the vSphere Networking for ESX5 guide, you can read: If you enter 0 or leave the option blank, the port group can see only untagged (non-VLAN) traffic. If you enter 4095, the port group can see traffic on any VLAN while leaving the VLAN tags intact. So, in theory, it should work, right? Hope you can help me up with this one Thanks

    Read the article

  • Linux port-based routing using iptables/ip route

    - by user42055
    I have the following setup: 192.168.0.4 192.168.0.6 192.168.0.1 +-----------+ +---------+ +----------+ |WORKSTATION|------| LINUX |------| GATEWAY | +-----------+ +---------+ +----------+ 192.168.150.10 | 192.168.150.9 +---------+ | VPN | +---------+ 192.168.150.1 WORKSTATION has a default route of 192.168.0.6 LINUX has a default route of 192.168.0.1 I am trying to use the gateway as the default route, but route port 80 traffic via the VPN. Based on what I read at http://www.linuxhorizon.ro/iproute2.html I have tried this: echo "1 VPN" >> /etc/iproute2/rt_tables sysctl net.ipv4.conf.eth0.rp_filter = 0 sysctl net.ipv4.conf.tun0.rp_filter = 0 sysctl net.ipv4.conf.all.rp_filter = 0 iptables -A PREROUTING -t mangle -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -j MARK --set-mark 0x1 ip route add default via 192.168.150.9 dev tun0 table VPN ip rule add from all fwmark 0x1 table VPN When I run "tcpdump -i eth0 port 80" on LINUX, and open a webpage on WORKSTATION, I don't see the traffic go through LINUX at all. When I run a ping from WORKSTATION, I get this back from some packets: 92 bytes from 192.168.0.6: Redirect Host(New addr: 192.168.0.1) Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst 4 5 00 0054 de91 0 0000 3f 01 4ed3 192.168.0.4 139.134.2.18 Is this why my routing is not working ? Do I need to put GATEWAY and LINUX on different subnets to prevent WORKSTATION being redirected to GATEWAY ? Do I need to use NAT at all, or can I do this with routing alone (which is what I want) ?

    Read the article

  • Port mirroring on multiple switches

    - by Matt
    So here is the deal, I have a server on switch A where port 3 is monitoring traffic for most of the ports on switch A. However I have other users on switch B that needs to have port 3 on switch A monitor as well. Is this possible? I have been reading about rspan but doesnt seem to work. Switch A: monitor session 1 source interface fast0/1 - 2 monitor session 1 source interface fast0/4 - 46 monitor session 1 destination interface fast0/3 (this works great for switch A, I need a solution to get switch B to also have some ports sent to port 3 on switch A for monitoring.) Onxx, All the traffic on switch A is fine, there will be about 10-15 ports on switch B that I need to send to fa0/3 on switch A as the destination. I have the switches connected with a ethernet cable with a trunk port on both switches on port 48 on switch B and A and port 47 on A connects to our sonicwall. So I am assuming they are daisy chained? What if I did the following: Switch A monitor session 1 source interface fast0/1 - 2 monitor session 1 source interface fast0/4 - 46 monitor session 1 destination interface fast0/3 Put all of the ports on vlan 10 because I made an rspan vlan 10 On switch B monitor the ports I need will say 1-10 monitor session 1 source interface fast0/1 - 10 monitor session 1 destination remote vlan 10 as a prerequisite I would have created vlan 10 as a rspan vlan on switch B. Switch A Monitor session 1 destination remote vlan 10 Would this work? By the way I am working with cisco catalyst 3560 switches.

    Read the article

  • Only tunnel certain applications via OpenVPN

    - by jinjin
    Hi, I've purchased a VPN solution, it works correctly when I have "redirect-gateway def1" in the configuration file (routing all traffic through the VPN). However when I remove that line from the configuration file, I am still able to ping-out of the machine (ping -I tap0), however I cannot ping the IP assigned to the machine (it's a public ip), i get the error: Destination Host Unreachable. I only want to have certain applications sending traffic through the VPN tunnel (eg: ZNC, irssi), all of which i can select which IP they use. However they can't recieve any data, making the tunnel essentially useless to me when disabling redirect-gateway. Any ideas on how to allow specific applications use the tunnel, without of forcing everything to go through it? My configuration file is as follows: dev tap remote #.#.#.# float #.#.#.# port 5129 comp-lzo ifconfig #.#.#.# 255.255.255.128 route-gateway #.#.#.# #redirect-gateway def1 secret key.txt cipher AES-128-CBC The output of ifconfig -a when the tunnel is connected: tap0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:ff:47:d3:6d:f3 inet addr:#.#.#.# Bcast:#.#.#.# Mask:255.255.255.255 inet6 addr: <snip> Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:612 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:35 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:25704 (25.1 KiB) TX bytes:6427 (6.2 KiB) EDIT: the Bcast:#.#.#.# (ifconfig) is different from route-gateway #.#.#.# (openvpn) if that makes any difference.

    Read the article

  • Easiest way to allow direct HTTPS connection in Intercept mode?

    - by Nicolo
    I know the SSL issue has been beaten to death I'm using DNS redirect to force my clients to use my intercept proxy. As we all know, intercepting HTTPS connection is not possible unless I provide a fake certificate. What I want to achieve here is to allow all HTTPS requests connect directly to the source server, thus bypassing Squid: HTTP connection Proxy by Squid HTTPS connection Bypass Squid and connect directly I spent the past few days goolging and trying different methods but none worked so far. I read about SSL tunneling using the CONNECT method but couldn't find any more information on it. I tried a similar method in using RINETD to forward all traffic going through port 443 of my Squid back to the original IP of www.pandora.com. Unfortunately, I did not realize all other HTTPS requests are also forwarded to the IP of www.pandora.com. For example, https://www.gmail.com also takes me to https://www.pandora.com Since I'm running the Intercept mode, the forwarding needs to be dynamic and match each HTTPS domain name with proper original IP. Can this be done in Squid or iptables? Lastly, I'm directing traffic to my Squid server using DNS zone redirect. For example, a client requests www.google.com, my DNS server directs that request to my Squid IP, then my transparent Squid will proxy that request. Will this set up affect what I'm trying to achieve? I tried many methods but couldn't get it to work. Any takes on how to do this?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380  | Next Page >