Search Results

Search found 4721 results on 189 pages for 'traffic'.

Page 56/189 | < Previous Page | 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63  | Next Page >

• Testing realistic loads for new versions of existing web app

  - by David Cournapeau

  Assuming I have a relatively complex web application, I am interested in testing performances of a new version using a traffic as realistic as possible. Traffic is relatively complex (session-based, lots of internal logic which depends on incoming requests). The webapp depends on many servers (databases, frontends, etc...). I can think of two basic directions: Recording every incoming request with its timestamp in production in a centralized manner and replaying it from N clients to reproduce a load as close as possible as the original. Issue: because we have many servers, getting the centralized log is not trivial. having a system duplicating requests to a staging area so that I could "plug" a dev version of my webapp to it at anytime without affecting the production. Issue: I have not found much information about it expect this, which suggests to me that may not be the best solution. OTOH, it is realistic by definition. What is the standard way of doing this kind of testing ? I did not find much information about load testing with complex, realistic traffic.

  Read the article

• Vyatta internet connection + hosted site on same IP

  - by boburob

  Having a small issue setting up a vyatta. The company internet and two different websites are both on the same IP. Server 1 - Has websites hosted on ports 1000 and 3000 and also has a proxy server installed to provide internet connection to the domain Server 2 - Has a website hosted on ports 80 and 433 The vyatta is correctly natting the appropriate traffic to each server, and allowing the proxy to get internet traffic, however I have a problem getting to the websites hosted on these two servers inside the domain. I believe the problem is that the HTTP request is being sent with an IP, eg: 12.34.56.78. The request will reach the website and the server will attempt to send the request back to the IP, however this is the IP of the Vyatta, so it has nowhere else to go. I thought the solution would be something like this: rule 50 { destination { address 12.34.56.78 port 1000 } inbound-interface eth1 inside-address { address 10.19.2.3 } protocol tcp type destination } But this doesnt seem to do it! UPDATE I changed the rules to the following: rule 50 { destination { address 12.34.56.78 port 443 } outbound-interface eth1 protocol tcp source { address 10.19.2.3 } type masquerade } rule 51 { destination { address 12.34.56.78 port 443 } inbound-interface eth1 inside-address { address 10.19.2.2 } protocol tcp type destination } I am now seeing traffic going between the two with Wireshark, but the website will still fail to load.

  Read the article

• Virtual Machine Network Architecture, Isolating Public and Private Networks

  - by Mark

  I'm looking for some insight into best practices for network traffic isolation within a virtual environment, specifically under VMWARE ESXi. Currently I have (in testing) 1 hardware server running ESXi but i expect to expand this to multiple pieces of hardware. The current setup is as follows: 1 pfsense VM, this VM accepts all outside (WAN/internet) traffic and performs firewall/port forwarding/NAT functionality. I have multiple public IP addresses sent to the this VM that are used for access to individual servers (via per incoming IP port forwarding rules). This VM is attached to the private (virtual) network that all other VMs are on. It also manages a VPN link into the private network with some access restrictions. This isn't the perimeter firewall but rather the firewall for this virtual pool only. I have 3 VMs that communicate with each other, as well as have some public access requirements: 1 LAMP server running an eCommerce site, public internet accessible 1 accounting server, access via windows server 2008 RDS services for remote access by users 1 inventory/warehouse management server, VPN to client terminals in warehouses These servers constantly talk with each other for data synchronization. Currently all the servers are on the same subnet/virtual network and connected to the internet through the pfsense VM. The pfsense firewall uses port forwarding and NAT to allow outside access to the servers for services and for server access to the internet. My main question is this: Is there a security benefit to adding a second virtual network adapter to each server and controlling traffic such that all server to server communication is on one separate virtual network, while any access to the outside world is routed through the other network adapter, through the firewall, and on the the internet. This is the type of architecture i would use if these were all physical servers, but i'm unsure if the networks being virtual changes the way i should approach locking down this system. Thank you for any thoughts or direction to any appropriate literature.

  Read the article

• Time-Machine backup over SSH tunnel to NFS mount

  - by BTZ

  I've recently started using a new NAS which runs CentOS 6.2. One of the purposes of the NAS would be to serve as a backup target. Whilst I have been using Apple's Time-Machine for a while and I am very satisfied with it, I'd like to continue using it. Backing up directly to an address in my network is no hassle; all works fine. For security reasons I'd like all my traffic to go through an ssh tunnel to the NAS. This way I can avoid needing to get a VPNserver (for personal reasons). As of NFSv4 the NFS deamon is bound to port 2049, which makes it easy for me to direct all traffic through a ssh tunnel. Tunnel: ssh -f admin@ms -L 2000:localhost:2049 -N Mount: mount -t nfs -o nfsvers=4,rw,proto=tcp,sync,intr,hard,timeo=600,retrans=10,wsize=32768,rsize=32768,port=2000 localhost:/mac_backup /Volumes/backup This works fine for Finder/terminal and throughput is almost equal to direct traffic. (CPU of the NAS does ride high when I reach max bandwidth though) Now the problem: With Time-Machine I can't use the NFS mount point mounted on localhost. TM seems to try to connect to it and then give me a "OSStatus error 65". I also tried using NFSv3 (I correctly forwarded all ports) with no luck. Can anyone shed a light on this and/or give a solution?

  Read the article

• FreeBSD's ng_nat stopping pass the packets periodically

  - by Korjavin Ivan

  I have FreeBSD router: #uname 9.1-STABLE FreeBSD 9.1-STABLE #0: Fri Jan 18 16:20:47 YEKT 2013 It's a powerful computer with a lot of memory #top -S last pid: 45076; load averages: 1.54, 1.46, 1.29 up 0+21:13:28 19:23:46 84 processes: 2 running, 81 sleeping, 1 waiting CPU: 3.1% user, 0.0% nice, 32.1% system, 5.3% interrupt, 59.5% idle Mem: 390M Active, 1441M Inact, 785M Wired, 799M Buf, 5008M Free Swap: 8192M Total, 8192M Free PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 11 root 4 155 ki31 0K 64K RUN 3 71.4H 254.83% idle 13 root 4 -16 - 0K 64K sleep 0 101:52 103.03% ng_queue 0 root 14 -92 0 0K 224K - 2 229:44 16.55% kernel 12 root 17 -84 - 0K 272K WAIT 0 213:32 15.67% intr 40228 root 1 22 0 51060K 25084K select 0 20:27 1.66% snmpd 15052 root 1 52 0 104M 22204K select 2 4:36 0.98% mpd5 19 root 1 16 - 0K 16K syncer 1 0:48 0.20% syncer Its tasks are: NAT via ng_nat and PPPoE server via mpd5. Traffic through - about 300Mbit/s, about 40kpps at peak. Pppoe sessions created - 350 max. ng_nat is configured by by the script: /usr/sbin/ngctl -f- <<-EOF mkpeer ipfw: nat %s out name ipfw:%s %s connect ipfw: %s: %s in msg %s: setaliasaddr 1.1.%s There are 20 such ng_nat nodes, with about 150 clients. Sometimes, the traffic via nat stops. When this happens vmstat reports a lot of FAIL counts vmstat -z | grep -i netgraph ITEM SIZE LIMIT USED FREE REQ FAIL SLEEP NetGraph items: 72, 10266, 1, 376,39178965, 0, 0 NetGraph data items: 72, 10266, 9, 10257,2327948820,2131611,4033 I was tried increase net.graph.maxdata=10240 net.graph.maxalloc=10240 but this doesn't work. It's a new problem (1-2 week). The configuration had been working well for about 5 months and no configuration changes were made leading up to the problems starting. In the last few weeks we have slightly increased traffic (from 270 to 300 mbits) and little more pppoe sessions (300-350). Help me please, how to find and solve my problem?

  Read the article

• Problem routing between directly connected Subnets w/ ASA-5510

  - by Zephyr Pellerin

  This is an issue I've been struggling with for quite some time, with a seemingly simple answer (Aren't all IT problems?). And that is the problem of passing traffic between two directly connected subnets with an ASA While I'm aware that best practice is to have Internet - Firewall - Router, in many cases this isn't possible. For example, In have an ASA with two interfaces, named OutsideNetwork (10.19.200.3/24) and InternalNetwork (10.19.4.254/24). You'd expect Outside to be able to get to, say, 10.19.4.1, or at LEAST 10.19.4.254, but pinging the interface gives only bad news. Result of the command: "ping OutsideNetwork 10.19.4.254" Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.19.4.254, timeout is 2 seconds: ????? Success rate is 0 percent (0/5) Naturally, you'd assume that you could add a static route, to no avail. [ERROR] route Outsidenetwork 10.19.4.0 255.255.255.0 10.19.4.254 1 Cannot add route, connected route exists At this point, you might gander if its a NAT or Access list problem. access-list Outsidenetwork_access_in extended permit ip any any access-list Internalnetwork_access_in extended permit ip any any There is no dynamic nat (or static nat for that matter), and Unnatted traffic is permitted. When I try pinging the above address (10.19.4.254 from Outsidenetwork), I get this error message from level 0 logging (debugging). Routing failed to locate next hop for icmp from NP Identity Ifc:10.19.200.3/0 to Outsidenetwork:10.19.4.1/0 This led me to set same-security traffic permit, and assigned the same, lesser and greater security numbers between the two interfaces. Am I overlooking something obvious? Is there a command to set static routes that are classified higher than connected routes?

  Read the article

• Wireshark WPA 4-way handshake

  - by cYrus

  From this wiki page: WPA and WPA2 use keys derived from an EAPOL handshake to encrypt traffic. Unless all four handshake packets are present for the session you're trying to decrypt, Wireshark won't be able to decrypt the traffic. You can use the display filter eapol to locate EAPOL packets in your capture. I've noticed that the decryption works with (1, 2, 4) too, but not with (1, 2, 3). As far as I know the first two packets are enough, at least for what concern unicast traffic. Can someone please explain exactly how does Wireshark deal with that, in other words why does only the former sequence work, given that the fourth packet is just an acknowledgement? Also, is it guaranteed that the (1, 2, 4) will always work when (1, 2, 3, 4) works? Test case This is the gzipped handshake (1, 2, 4) and an ecrypted ARP packet (SSID: SSID, password: password) in base64 encoding: H4sICEarjU8AA2hhbmRzaGFrZS5jYXAAu3J400ImBhYGGPj/n4GhHkhfXNHr37KQgWEqAwQzMAgx 6HkAKbFWzgUMhxgZGDiYrjIwKGUqcW5g4Ldd3rcFQn5IXbWKGaiso4+RmSH+H0MngwLUZMarj4Rn S8vInf5yfO7mgrMyr9g/Jpa9XVbRdaxH58v1fO3vDCQDkCNv7mFgWMsAwXBHMoEceQ3kSMZbDFDn ITk1gBnJkeX/GDkRjmyccfus4BKl75HC2cnW1eXrjExNf66uYz+VGLl+snrF7j2EnHQy3JjDKPb9 3fOd9zT0TmofYZC4K8YQ8IkR6JaAT0zIJMjxtWaMmCEMdvwNnI5PYEYJYSTHM5EegqhggYbFhgsJ 9gJXy42PMx9JzYKEcFkcG0MJULYE2ZEGrZwHIMnASwc1GSw4mmH1JCCNQYEF7C7tjasVT+0/J3LP gie59HFL+5RDIdmZ8rGMEldN5s668eb/tp8vQ+7OrT9jPj/B7425QIGJI3Pft72dLxav8BefvcGU 7+kfABxJX+SjAgAA Decode with: $ base64 -d | gunzip > handshake.cap Run tshark to see if it correctly decrypt the ARP packet: $ tshark -r handshake.cap -o wlan.enable_decryption:TRUE -o wlan.wep_key1:wpa-pwd:password:SSID It should print: 1 0.000000 D-Link_a7:8e:b4 - HonHaiPr_22:09:b0 EAPOL Key 2 0.006997 HonHaiPr_22:09:b0 - D-Link_a7:8e:b4 EAPOL Key 3 0.038137 HonHaiPr_22:09:b0 - D-Link_a7:8e:b4 EAPOL Key 4 0.376050 ZyxelCom_68:3a:e4 - HonHaiPr_22:09:b0 ARP 192.168.1.1 is at 00:a0:c5:68:3a:e4

  Read the article

• Amazon EC2 Nat Instance - goes out but not back in

  - by nocode

  I've followed Amazon's steps and list what I've done. I've created 6 subnets (4 private SN1: 10.50.1.0/24, SN2: 10.50.2.0/24, SN3: 10.50.3.0/24, SN4: 10.50.4.0/24) and 2 public (SN5: 10.50.101.0/24 and SN6: 10.50.102.0/24) -I have a Bastion host and a NAT instance on SN5 and assigned EIP's to both. I created a test instance on SN1. edit: -NAT instance has source/destination check disabled -On the NAT instance, I had enabled the following commands to be bootstrapped: echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.0.0/16 -j MASQUERADE -In my VPC, the private subnets have their own route table and configured 0.0.0.0/0 to the NAT instance with 4 subnets being associated with the route table. I have a second route table for my public subnets and 0.0.0.0/16 is pointed towards the IGW (with the other 2 subnets associated with it). -For Security Groups, I have the NAT instance accepting all traffic on each of the 4 subnets and all OUTBOUND traffic is allowed. For my test server, I have allowed all outbound access and have allowed all traffic from the public subnet of the NAT host. I can ping internally with no issues. On my test instance, if I try to ping google.com, DNS resolves however I don't get a reply back. On my NAT instance, I run a tcpdump and can see the request being requested to google.com but it's not sending the reply back. My NAT host can ping and receive a reply from google. From the test host, when I ping the NAT instance, the tcpdump shows a request and receive. Is there something I'm missing? EDIT: I've figured it out - I had to save the iptable config and restart the service.

  Read the article

• Cisco 3560+ipservices -- IGMP snooping issue with TTL=1

  - by Jander

  I've got a C3560 with Enhanced (IPSERVICES) image, routing multicast between its VLANs with no external multicast router. It's serving a test environment where developers may generate multicast traffic on arbitrary addresses. Everything is working fine except when someone sends out multicast traffic with TTL=1, in which case the multicast packet suppression fails and the traffic is broadcast to all members of the VLAN. It looks to me like because the TTL is 1, the multicast routing subsystem doesn't see the packets, so it doesn't create a mroute table entry. If I send out packets with TTL=2 briefly, then switch to TTL=1 packets, they are filtered correctly until the mroute entry expires. My question: is there some trick to getting the switch to filter the TTL=1 packets, or am I out of luck? Below are the relevant parts of the config, with a representative VLAN interface. I can provide more info as needed. #show run ... ip routing ip multicast-routing distributed no ip igmp snooping report-suppression ! interface Vlan44 ip address 172.23.44.1 255.255.255.0 no ip proxy-arp ip pim passive ... #show ip igmp snooping vlan 44 Global IGMP Snooping configuration: ------------------------------------------- IGMP snooping : Enabled IGMPv3 snooping (minimal) : Enabled Report suppression : Disabled TCN solicit query : Disabled TCN flood query count : 2 Robustness variable : 2 Last member query count : 2 Last member query interval : 1000 Vlan 44: -------- IGMP snooping : Enabled IGMPv2 immediate leave : Disabled Multicast router learning mode : pim-dvmrp CGMP interoperability mode : IGMP_ONLY Robustness variable : 2 Last member query count : 2 Last member query interval : 1000

  Read the article

• Varnish with multiple sites/boxes

  - by jerhinesmith

  Is it possible for Varnish to redirect traffic to different IPs based on the url? For example, is the following setup feasible (and if so, what would the VCL look like): *.example.com points to Varnish IP address When a request is made to foo.example.com, varnish checks the cache and sends the request to Server1's IP address on a cache miss. When a request is made to bar.example.com, varnish checks the cache and sends the request to Server2's IP address on a cache miss. foo and bar are (for the most part) completely unrelated sites. They use the engine, but have different content and their own distinct database. Since there previously was no penalty for doing so (other than cost) we split them up into two separate boxes so that a ton of traffic to foo won't have a negative impact on visitors browsing around bar. I could set up two instances of varnish and have one serve up foo's static content and the other serve up bar's, but as there doesn't seem to be much overhead to running Varnish, I think (perhaps mistakenly) that it would make more sense to go with one Varnish server that redirects the traffic to the appropriate box on a cache miss.

  Read the article

• Iptables rules, forward between two interfaces

  - by Marco

  i have a some difficulties in configuring my ubuntu server firewall ... my situation is this: eth0 - internet eth1 - lan1 eth2 - lan2 I want that clients from lan1 can't communicate with clients from lan2, except for some specific services. E.g. i want that clients in lan1 can ssh into client in lan2, but only that. Any other comunication is forbidden. So, i add this rules to iptables: #Block all traffic between lan, but permit traffic to internet iptables -I FORWARD -i eth1 -o ! eth0 -j DROP iptables -I FORWARD -i eth2 -o ! eth0 -j DROP # Accept ssh traffic from lan1 to client 192.168.20.2 in lan2 iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth2 -p tcp --dport 22 -d 192.168.20.2 -j ACCEPT This didn't works. Doing iptables -L FORWARD -v i see: Chain FORWARD (policy DROP 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 33 144 DROP all -- eth1 !eth0 anywhere anywhere 0 0 DROP all -- eth2 !eth0 anywhere anywhere 23630 20M ACCEPT all -- any any anywhere anywhere state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 0 0 ACCEPT all -- eth1 any anywhere anywhere 175 9957 ACCEPT all -- eth1 any anywhere anywhere 107 6420 ACCEPT all -- eth2 any anywhere anywhere 0 0 ACCEPT all -- pptp+ any anywhere anywhere 0 0 ACCEPT all -- tun+ any anywhere anywhere 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth1 eth2 anywhere server2.lan tcp dpt:ssh All packets are dropped, and the count of packets for the last rule is 0 ... How i have to modify my configuration? Thank you. Regards Marco

  Read the article

• Joomla performance problems on AWS

  - by Bobby Jack

  I'm running a site on AWS with the following setup: Single m1.small instance (web server) Single RDS m1.small db Joomla 1.5 Generally, the site is performant, but is fairly low-traffic - say around 50-100 visits / hour. However, at peak time, we see about double that traffic. During peak time, pretty much every day: CPU usage on the web server slowly climbs to 100% CPU usage on the RDS server climbs quite quickly to about 30%, from an average of about 15 Database connections shoot up to about 140, from a normal average of about 2 or 3 The site is then occasionally unreachable, certainly according to pingdom monitoring. Does anyone recognise this behaviour? Can you point me in the right direction to begin investigating? Of course, RDS makes it difficult to do things like slow query logging, so I've started by regularly dumping the mysql process list into a file to see if there's anything I can spot there, but it would be good to have something more concrete to investigate. UPDATE At least, can someone confirm that I'm definitely right in saying that the level of traffic implies the problem must be a specific type of query taking way longer than it should to execute? This would happen if a table gets locked, and many queries need to write to it, right? For this very reason, I've already changed the __session table type to InnoDB.

  Read the article

• What is the recommended glusterFS configuration for a growing website?

  - by montana

  Hello, I have a website that is tracking towards 50 million hits per day average, and within the next 3 months should be over 100 million hits per day. We are trying to use GlusterFS v 3.0.0 (with latest patches as of 1-17-2010) Currently, we've just upgraded to a load balancer environment that has 3 physical hosts with 6 Xen-Server 5.5u1 VM's (2 on each host) to serve webpage traffic. Each machine has 6 Raid-6 local storage drives (7200RPM-SATA). The old machine we came from had 1 mirrored SAS 10k drive. We also set up glusterFS currently with 3 bricks, one on each host, and it is serving the 6 VM's as clients. In testing, everything seemed fine. However when we went to production, it seemed that there just wasn't enough I/O's available to serve traffic even upwards of 15mil hits. Weeks prior, our old server was able to handle traffic, maxed out, at 20mil. Is there any recommended configurations for such an application, or things to be aware of that isn't apparent with their documentation at gluster.org for a site our size?

  Read the article

• Amazon EC2: Instances, IPs and a wordpress blog (LAMP)

  - by JustinXXVII

  I had a link to my blog posted on Reddit yesterday and MySQL crashed on my EC2 Micro instance. I know I didn't have that many visitors because I used a marketing link that tracks hits. The link got 167 hits over the course of the last 18 hours, and MySQL crashed twice. So anyway, 167 visits is not a lot, so I've done some short term optimizations like restricting the number of Apache threads to limit the MySQL calls. I also set up WP Super Cache to serve static content. Soon I'm going to offload all of my images to S3 or CloudFront. So this leads me to my question. If this doesn't seem to help, and if i have another traffic "spike", how do AMIs work when you have a MySQL database? I think I understand that if you have more than one instance and assign the same Elastic IP to both of them, the incoming traffic gets distributed among both. But what happens when the MySQL database gets updated on one of the instances? I just need to wrap my mind around what happens when I create an AMI and then launch a new instance to help with traffic. Thanks for your suggestions.

  Read the article

• Monitoring instantaneous network throughput at one second intervals?

  - by Shaddi

  For a testing setup I have, I need to monitor the throughput through a "router"* at regular intervals of around 5 seconds or less (sub-second intervals would be very nice, but not required). Ideally, I would be able to generate a file which contained both the number of bytes and packets seen during each interval. I will eventually be generating a time-series of throughput from this data. On a previous setup using an older version of FreeBSD, there was a tool called "bpfmon" which gave me this information. However, I need to do this under a modern version of Linux (namely, Ubuntu 11.04). I have looked at both iptraf and iftop, but these do not appear to provide the resolution I need, nor do they seem to easily allow scraping the data I need. I understand iptables statistics may be able to give me what I'm after, but the examples I've seen of this seem to rely on repeatedly reading and resetting traffic counters, which seems like it could give inaccurate as read/reset is not an atomic operation. I already capture a tcpdump trace of the traffic I'm interested in on the link I want to monitor, so I am open to approaches which simply parse that. I feel like this must be a common problem though, so I am hoping there will be a standard "best practice" tool for accomplishing this. *I say "router" in quotes because I am really talking about a machine with two bridged NICs through which all the traffic I'm interested in passes.

  Read the article

• Packet flooding while configuring a Debian L2TP/IPSec client?

  - by Joseph B.

  I'm currently at my wits end trying to configure an L2TP over IPSec VPN connection on my Debian using openswan and xl2tp box connecting to a server of unknown configuration. I've managed to successfully establish the connection and everything appears to be working well until I attempt to set the VPN connection as my default route, at which point I see a massive flood of packets simultaneously being transmitted (on the tune of ~1.5 GB in about 2min) until the server drops my connection. Prior to this network traffic on all my interfaces is minimal. According to iftop the majority of this traffic appears to be coming out of port 12, although I can't seem to figure out how to finger a specific process. If I instead just route traffic destined for 74.0.0.0/8 through it I'm able to access Google's servers through the VPN without issue. My xl2tp.conf file is: [lac vpn-nl] lns = example.vpn.com name = myusername pppoptfile = /etc/ppp/options.l2tpd.client My options.l2tpd.client file is: ipcp-accept-local ipcp-accept-remote refuse-eap require-mschap-v2 noccp noauth idle 1800 mtu 1410 mru 1410 usepeerdns lock name myusername password mypassword connect-delay 5000 And my routing table looks like: Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 10.5.2.1 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0 10.0.50.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.50.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.0.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 192.168.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 loopback * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo default * 0.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 ppp0 I'm seeing absolutely nothing in auth.log and syslog during this time and can't seem to find any other log files it might be writing to. Any suggestions would be appreciated!

  Read the article

• How to set a static route for an external IP address

  - by HorusKol

  Further to my earlier question about bridging different subnets - I now need to route requests for one particular IP address differently to all other traffic. I have the following routing in my iptables on our router: # Allow established connections, and those !not! coming from the public interface # eth0 = public interface # eth1 = private interface #1 (10.1.1.0/24) # eth2 = private interface #2 (129.2.2.0/25) iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -m state --state NEW ! -i eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth2 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allow outgoing connections from the private interfaces iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth2 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT # Allow the two private connections to talk to each other iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth2 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth2 -o eth1 -j ACCEPT # Masquerade (NAT) iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE # Don't forward any other traffic from the public to the private iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -j REJECT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth2 -j REJECT This configuration means that users will be forwarded through a modem/router with a public address - this is all well and good for most purposes, and in the main it doesn't matter that all computers are hidden behind the one public IP. However, some users need to be able to access a proxy at 192.111.222.111:8080 - and the proxy needs to identify this traffic as coming through a gateway at 129.2.2.126 - it won't respond otherwise. I tried adding a static route on our local gateway with: route add -host 192.111.222.111 gw 129.2.2.126 dev eth2 I can successfully ping 192.111.222.111 from the router. When I trace the route, it lists the 129.2.2.126 gateway, but I just get * on each of the following hops (I think this makes sense since this is just a web-proxy and requires authentication). When I try to ping this address from a host on the 129.2.2.0/25 network it fails. Should I do this in the iptables chain instead? How would I configure this routing?

  Read the article

• Allied Telesis router: IP filtering for the LOCAL interface

  - by syneticon-dj

  Given an Allied Telesis router with an AlliedWare OS (2.9.1) I would like to disable access to all management services of the router except for a number of subnets (or alternatively have what is a "management VLAN" with other manufacturers' switch and router models). What I have tried so far: creating a new VLAN and an appropriate IP interface, setting the LOCAL IP into this subnet, creating an IP filter for the IP interface and specifying my exclusion subnets: it simply does not work as intended as I can access the LOCAL IP set from any of the other VLAN interfaces - the traffic is apparently not going through my defined filter set at all creating a new IP filter set and binding it to the LOCAL IP interface: this seems not to affect any kind of traffic at all, the counters for the filter set remain at zero packets setting the Remote Security Officer Level IP address range: this only restricts the ability for a user with the Security Officer privilege level to log in from any but the specified address ranges / subnets. Unfortunately, it does not prevent service availability (and thus DoS capacity) or the ability to log in as a less privileged user (e.g. a "manager") calling technical support: unfortunately no solution so far What I have not tried: creating a filter set for each and every IP interface defined on the router and excluding access to the router's management IP: I would like to reduce the overhead induced by IP filters as the router already is CPU-constrained at times. Setting up filters for every IP interface would mean that each and every traffic packet would have to pass the filters, thus consuming CPU cycles. If by any means possible, I would like to find a different solution.

  Read the article

• Zero downtime deployment (Tomcat), Nginx or HAProxy, behind hardware LB - how to "starve" old server?

  - by alexeypro

  Currently we have the following setup. Hardware Load Balancer (LB) Box A running Tomcat on 8080 (TA) Box B running Tomcat on 8080 (TB) TA and TB are running behind LB. For now it's pretty complicated and manual job to take Box A or Box B out of LB to do the zero downtime deployment. I am thinking to do something like this: Hardware Load Balancer (LB) Box A running Nginx on 8080 (NA) Box A running Tomcat on 8081 (TA1) Box A running Tomcat on 8082 (TA2) Box B running Nginx on 8080 (NB) Box B running Tomcat on 8081 (TB1) Box B running Tomcat on 8082 (TB2) Basically LB will be directing traffic between NA and NB now. On each of Nginx's we'll have TA1, TA2 and TB1, TB2 configured as upstream servers. Once one of the upstreams's healthcheck page is unresponsive (shutdown) the traffic goes to another one (HttpHealthcheckModule module on Nginx). So the deploy process is simple. Say, TA1 is active with version 0.1 of the app. Healthcheck on TA1 is OK. We start TA2 with Healthcheck on it as ERROR. So Nginx is not talking to it. We deploy app version 0.2 to TA2. Make sure it works. Now, we switch the Healthcheck on TA2 to OK, switch Healthcheck to TA1 to ERROR. Nginx will start serving TA2, and will remove TA1 out of rotation. Done! And now same with the other box. While it sounds all cool and nice, how do we "starve" the Nginx? Say we have pending connections, some users on TA1. If we just turn it off, sessions will break (we have cookie-based sessions). Not good. Any way to starve traffic to one of the upstream servers with Nginx? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Secure NAT setup with iptables

  - by TheBigB

  I have Debian running device that needs to act as an internet-gateway. On top of that I want to provide a firewall that not only blocks inbound traffic, but also outbound traffic. And I figured iptables should be able to do the job. The problem: I've configured NAT properly (I think?), but once I set the default policy to DROP and add rules to for instance allow HTTP traffic from inside the LAN, HTTP is not going through. So basically my rules don't seem to work. Below is the initialization script that I use for iptables. The device has two NICs, respectively eth0 (the WAN interface) and eth1 (the LAN interface). echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward # Flush tables iptables -F iptables -t nat -F # Set policies iptables -P INPUT DROP iptables -P OUTPUT DROP # NAT iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # Allow outbound HTTP from LAN? iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT Can anyone shed some light on this?

  Read the article

• Unusual HEAD requests to nonsense URLs from Chrome

  - by JeremyDWill

  I have noticed unusual traffic coming from my workstation the last couple of days. I am seeing HEAD requests sent to random character URLs, usually three or four within a second, and they appear to be coming from my Chrome browser. The requests repeat only three or four times a day, but I have not identified a particular pattern. The URL characters are different for each request. Here is an example of the request as recorded by Fiddler 2: HEAD http://xqwvykjfei/ HTTP/1.1 Host: xqwvykjfei Proxy-Connection: keep-alive Content-Length: 0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.13 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/9.0.597.98 Safari/534.13 Accept-Encoding: gzip,deflate,sdch Accept-Language: en-US,en;q=0.8 Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.3 The response to this request is as follows: HTTP/1.1 502 Fiddler - DNS Lookup Failed Content-Type: text/html Connection: close Timestamp: 08:15:45.283 Fiddler: DNS Lookup for xqwvykjfei failed. No such host is known I have been unable to find any information through Google searches related to this issue. I do not remember seeing this kind of traffic before late last week, but it may be that I just missed it before. The one modification I made to my system last week that was unusual was adding the Delicious add-in/extension to both IE and Chrome. I have since removed both of these, but am still seeing the traffic. I have run virus scan (Trend Micro) and HiJackThis looking for malicious code, but I have not found any. I would appreciate any help tracking down the source of the requests, so I can determine if they are benign, or indicative of a bigger problem. Thanks.

  Read the article

• OpenVPN / iptables restrict some access

  - by RitonLaJoie

  I want to create an openvpn service on a dedicated server I have, for some friends so that they are able to play online games faster. Is there an easy way to restrict which traffic I allow them with iptables ? It seems iptable is not very easy to maintain and we can easily get kicked out of our own server. Rebooting on a rescue mode every time I would get kicked out because of bad iptable rules would just be a pain. As far as I understand, the tun interface would be providing the access. Which kind of rule in iptables would I have to implement to restrict their access to only 1 ip ? Also, I don't want this vpn to be the default gateway for all the traffic. I guess I should go with the option of pushing a route to the clients so that they connect to the IP of the game server through the VPN and use their regular routes through their ISP for all the other traffic ? As a side not, it seems Openvpn AS is not very robust. Is there some other (commercial is ok) product that would give me the same administration options through a web interface ? Is Webmin the only other solution ? Thanks !

  Read the article

• How can one restrict network activity to only the VPN on a Mac and prevent unsecured internet activity?

  - by John

  I'm using Mac OS and connect to a VPN to hide my location and IP (I have the 'send all traffic over VPN connection' box checked in teh Network system pref), I wish to remain anonymous and do not wish to reveal my actual IP, hence the VPN. I have a prefpan called pearportVPN that automatically connects me to my VPN when I get online. The problem is, when I connect to the internet using Airport (or other means) I have a few seconds of unsecured internet connection before my Mac logs onto my VPN. Therefore its only a matter of time before I inadvertently expose my real IP address in the few seconds it takes between when I connect to the internet and when I log onto my VPN. Is there any way I can block any traffic to and from my Mac that does not go through my VPN, so that nothing can connect unless I'm logged onto my VPN? I suspect I would need to find a third party app that would block all traffic except through the Server Address, perhaps Intego Virus Barrier X6 or little snitch, but I'm afraid I'm not sure which is right or how to configure them. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Potential impact of large broadcast domains

  - by john

  I recently switched jobs. By the time I left my last job our network was three years old and had been planned very well (in my opinion). Our address range was split down into a bunch of VLANs with the largest subnet a /22 range. It was textbook. The company I now work for has built up their network over about 20 years. It's quite large, reaches multiple sites, and has an eclectic mix of devices. This organisation only uses VLANs for very specific things. I only know of one usage of VLANs so far and that is the SAN which also crosses a site boundary. I'm not a network engineer, I'm a support technician. But occasionally I have to do some network traces for debugging problems and I'm astounded by the quantity of broadcast traffic I see. The largest network is a straight Class B network, so it uses a /16 mask. Of course if that were filled with devices the network would likely grind to a halt. I think there are probably 2000+ physical and virtual devices currently using that subnet, but it (mostly) seems to work. This practise seems to go against everything I've been taught. My question is: In your opinion and  From my perspective - What measurement of which metric would tell me that there is too much broadcast traffic bouncing about the network? And what are the tell-tale signs that you are perhaps treading on thin ice? The way I see it, there are more and more devices being added and that can only mean more broadcast traffic, so there must be a threshold. Would things just get slower and slower, or would the effects be more subtle than that?

  Read the article

• Routing connections through VPN based on hostname (not IP range)

  - by Michal M

  This bugs me immensly. I need to connect to client's network through VPN. But I definitely do not want to send all the traffic through client's network so this option is out of question. What I need basically is for the OS to know that all client's network subdomains (*.example.com) need to go through the VPN connection. I tried a couple of options: Changing order of services and setting the VPN on top, but this works the same as "Send all traffic over VPN connection". Using "VPN on Demand" option from network advanced options, but this feature is quite rubbish to be honest. Seems to work only in Safari (?!) and it doesn't route the connection, but it basically triggers the OS to connect to the selected VPN. The reason I need it to work based on hostnames rather than IP range is simple - my client has a lot of servers inside his network and it's impossible for me to remember all IPs. They are all within a range, but this doesn't help me remembering. Another option would be to put the VPN connection on the bottom of network services and untick "Send all traffic..." and then put all known hostnames in hosts file, but considering there could be hundreds of servers (therefore hostnames and ips too) it ridiculous job. And if new server appears on the network I'd need to edit the hosts file again. Sisyphean labours. However this works on Windows very simply. If a hostname is not available through default network interface, then it seems to try VPN connection and this works brilliantly. So, how can I achieve that on Mac, then? I know client's internal DNS addresses if that is of any help (like directing a certain domains through a different DNS)? PS. Using latest version 10.6.6. PS2. I am using VPN to access intranet, version control servers (svn://), samba shares and for SSH access to servers.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63  | Next Page >