Search Results

Search found 8366 results on 335 pages for 'admin routing'.

Page 58/335 | < Previous Page | 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65  | Next Page >

• How do the routers communicate with each other ?

  - by Berkay

  Let's say that i want make a request a to a web page which is hosted in Europe (i live in USA).My packets only consist the IP address of the web page, first the domain name to ip address transformation is done, then my packets start their journey through to europe. i assume that MAC addresses never used in this situation? are they? First, my packets deal with many routers on way how these routers communicate with each other?, are router addresses added to my packet headers ? Second, is there a specific path router to router comminication or which conditions affect this route? Third to cross the Atlantic Ocean, are cables used or... ?

  Read the article

• how does ospf control flooding?

  - by iamrohitbanga

  what method is used by ospf protocol to prevent looping of flooded packets for link state advertisements? The packet header does not contain any timestamp. How do the routers recognize that it is the same advertisement that they sent before?

  Read the article

• Getting packets from one port to another on a Dell PowerConnect 2824 switch

  - by Arvo Bowen

  I have a dell PowerConnect 2824 and I have a cat 5 cable connected from port 1 to port 23. Port 1 is reserved for VLAN 1 (the only VLAN that can manage the switch) and port 18-23 belong to VLAN 112. I currently have the switch setup with ip 10.71.3.5/27 and a test machine plugged into port 22 with IP address 10.71.3.30/27. For some reason I can not ping 10.71.3.5 from my test machine (10.71.3.30). Note: When I try to ping the server plugged into port 21 (IP: 10.71.3.7/27) also VLAN 112, I get responses just fine. Note: When I plug my test machine directly into port 1, I can ping 10.71.3.5 just fine. Quick Recap: Switch IP: 10.71.3.5 Port 1 - dedicated to management - (VLAN1) Port 21 - SERVER (10.71.3.7/27) - (VLAN112) Port 22 - test machine (10.71.3.30/27) - (VLAN112) Port 23 - dedicated to management (to hop over to VLAN 1 from VLAN 112) - (VLAN112)

  Read the article

• Avoid corporate blocked URL's when on Cisco VPN

  - by Marcus

  When I'm on my home PC and on my company VPN I can't get to sites that my company blocks. Is there a way to get around this? Why do my requests to facebook.com go through the VPN? Can you configure your system to, for instance, not go through the VPN for HTTP traffic? Update: We are using Cisco VPN v 5, I'm running on XP

  Read the article

• private address in traceroute results

  - by misteryes

  I use traceroute to check paths on a remote host, and I notice that there are some private IPs, like 10.230.10.1 bash-4.0# traceroute -T 132.227.62.122 traceroute to 132.227.62.122 (132.227.62.122), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 194.199.68.161 (194.199.68.161) 1.103 ms 1.107 ms 1.097 ms 2 sw-ptu.univ.run (10.230.10.1) 1.535 ms 1.625 ms 2.172 ms 3 sw-univ-gazelle.univ.run (10.10.20.1) 6.891 ms 6.937 ms 6.927 ms 4 10.10.5.6 (10.10.5.6) 1.544 ms 1.517 ms 1.518 ms why there are private addresses near the host? what are the purposes that these private addresses are used? I mean why they want to put the public IP behind private IPs? thanks!

  Read the article

• Let vmware virtual machine connect to the world thru specialized interface

  - by flybywire

  I have vmware player, and I am running a special OS therein. My computer has two network interfaces, let's call them eth0 and eth1. I want to configure my computer so that all network traffic goes eth0 if and only if it originates in my virtual machine. If traffic belongs to my host OS then I want it to go thru eth1.

  Read the article

• RtKit on my ubuntu?

  - by Dimitri

  Hi I just updated my ubuntu karmic Koala to Lucid Lynx and found sth strange on my file /etc/passwd. rtkit:x:120:130:RealtimeKit,,,:/proc:/bin/false Can someone tell me what it is?

  Read the article

• Force10 layer 3 switches

  - by ALQ

  We've been running Cisco and dell layer 3 switches. The former are expensive and reliable, the latter a lot cheaper and fraught with issues. Anyone has positive experience with the core Force10 switches (and edge switches as well)?

  Read the article

• Blocking ports on the public IP assigned to lo interface in GNU/Linux

  - by nixnotwin

  I have setup my Ubuntu server as a router and webserver by following the answer given here. My ISP facing interface eth0 has a private 172.16.x.x/30 ip and my lo interface has a public IP as mentioned in the answer to the question linked above. The setup is working well. The only snag I have experienced is that I could not find a way to block the ports exposed by the public IP on the lo interface. I tried doing iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -j DROP, and my server lost connectivity to the public network (internet). I could not ping any public ips. What I want is a way to block ports that are exposed by the public ip on the lo interface. And also I require iptables rules that can expose ports like 80 or openvpn port to the public network.

  Read the article

• URL redirect to a virtual server on a VLAN

  - by zeroFiG

  I have a production site, running off 10 servers. I've been given another virtual server on the same network as these 10 servers, to use for testing purposes. This server doesn't have it's own DNS entry. Therefore I need to do a redirect to the site hosted on this virtual server for a sub-domain of the site running on the 10 other servers. So Basically I was wondering how I would configure a sub domain of my production server to point at the Virtual server for testing. I'm guessing I need to modify my site file in /etc/apache2/sites-available and add another virtual host like the following and modify the redirect match: <VirtualHost *> ServerName SUBDOMAIN.DOMAIN.com RedirectMatch 301 (.*) **IP ADDRESS** CustomLog /var/log/apache2/SUBDOMAIN.DOMAIN.com.access.log combined </VirtualHost> Do I set the redirect match to just the IP on the Virtual server, and then configure another site file in the sites-available directory, which will recption this redirect and point the browser towards the HTML root? Thanks, I hope I made myself clear.

  Read the article

• 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

• External mouse clicks not working during UAC prompt/windows or other elevated privilege programs

  - by user26453

  I have a Logitech Revolution VX, a small portable mouse. I use it on my laptop running Windows 7 64bit Professional. When a UAC prompt comes up, I can use the mouse to move the pointer, however any clicking via the external mouse is disabled. I have to use my trackpad to actually click. This continues on into whatever UAC window comes next, such as a program install. The mouse pointer can move via my external mouse, but no button clicks register except on the trackpad. This also happens if I am to right click a program and select "Run as Administrator". The external mouse will move the pointer, but no button clicks work. I've tried to google for this issue but haven't found anything. To be it seems generally a problem with my external mouse driver not running with elevated privileges itself. Any help would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• Domain names timing out after VPS IP change

  - by Fourjays

  I rent a CentOS 5 VPS from a UK-based provider, with DirectAdmin also installed. On Thursday night, they carried out planned maintenance to changed the two IPs I had been assigned to two new ones. On Friday, after the change had taken place, I updated my domain name records to reflect the IP change. Since then, all of the domains pointing to the VPS are timing out. Additionally, DirectAdmin was also not responding, but was was resolved by running the ipswap scripts as found in the DirectAdmin knowledgebase. It did not fix my domains though. I have contacted the VPS provider but I have been waiting for a response for some time now. I have checked again, and again, and all the IPs referenced in DirectAdmin are correct. If I go to the server IP in my browser it responds with "Apache is functioning normally." Email accounts on the server are also functioning correctly. But if I access a domain itself, it times out. Running a ping and a DNS look-up, I can confirm the nameserver IPs are correct. If I run a trace route it reaches an IP that is similar to my VPS IPs (last 2 blocks are different) before timing out (it never shows my server IP). I am relatively new to VPS management so don't have a vast wealth of experience with troubleshooting problems on them. I have checked all of the httpd configuration files, which don't seem to have any IP references in them at all. Looking in the Apache error logs, what errors there are do not coincide with times I have tried to access the site. Is this issue at my provider's end? Is there anything else I can check or test, to rule out post-IP-change problems with my server configuration? It was all running fine prior to the IP change.

  Read the article

• How to configure remote access to multiple subnets behind a SonicWALL NSA 2400

  - by Kyle Noland

  I have a client that uses a SonicWALL NSA 2400 as their firewall. I need to setup a second LAN subnet for a handful of PC. Management has decided that there should be a second subnet even though intend to allow access across the two subnets - I know... I'm having trouble getting communication across the 2 subnets. I can ping each gateway, but I cannot ping or seem to route traffic fron subnet A to subnet B. Here is my current setup: X0 Interface: LAN zone with IP addres 192.168.1.1 X1 Interface: WAN zone with WAN IP address X2 Interface: LAN zone with IP address 192.168.75.1 I have configured ARP and routes for the secondar subnet (X2) according to this SonicWALL KB article: http://www.sonicwall.com/downloads/supporting_multiple_firewalled_subnets_on_sonicos_enhanced.pdf using "Example 1". At this point I don't minding if I have to throw the SonicWALL GVC software VPN client into the mix to make it work. It feel like I have an Access Rule issue, but for testing I made LAN LAN, WAN LAN and VPN LAN rules wide open with the same results.

  Read the article

• How to tell Windows 7 to ignore a default gateway

  - by zildjohn01

  I currently have 2 network cards in my PC -- one connected to an internal network on a router with a disconnected WAN port (10.x.x.x), and one connected to the internet through a consumer router (192.168.0.x). Windows seems to recognize them correctly (my "Network and Sharing Center" lists them as "No Internet" and "Internet" respectively), however when I try browsing the internet it always tries the internal network's default gateway, rather than the one with internet access. Trying to ping a website results in "Reply from 10.0.0.1: Destination net unreachable.". A simple "route delete 0.0.0.0 mask 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1" fixes the problems, but they return upon reboot, or upon renewing my IP. Is there any way to tell Windows to ignore one NIC's default gateway, or to at least give them priorities?

  Read the article

• RFC 1918 address on open internet?

  - by longneck

  In trying to diagnose a failover problem with my Cisco ASA 5520 firewalls, I ran a traceroute to www.btfl.com and, much to my surprise, some of the hops came back as RFC 1918 addresses. Just to be clear, this host is not behind my firewall and there is no VPN involved. I have to connect across the open internet to get there. How/why is this possible? asa# traceroute www.btfl.com Tracing the route to 157.56.176.94 1 <redacted> 2 <redacted> 3 <redacted> 4 <redacted> 5 nap-edge-04.inet.qwest.net (67.14.29.170) 0 msec 10 msec 10 msec 6 65.122.166.30 0 msec 0 msec 10 msec 7 207.46.34.23 10 msec 0 msec 10 msec 8 * * * 9 207.46.37.235 30 msec 30 msec 50 msec 10 10.22.112.221 30 msec 10.22.112.219 30 msec 10.22.112.223 30 msec 11 10.175.9.193 30 msec 30 msec 10.175.9.67 30 msec 12 100.94.68.79 40 msec 100.94.70.79 30 msec 100.94.71.73 30 msec 13 100.94.80.39 30 msec 100.94.80.205 40 msec 100.94.80.137 40 msec 14 10.215.80.2 30 msec 10.215.68.16 30 msec 10.175.244.2 30 msec 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * and it does the same thing from my FiOS connection at home: C:\>tracert www.btfl.com Tracing route to www.btfl.com [157.56.176.94] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms myrouter.home [192.168.1.1] 2 8 ms 7 ms 8 ms <redacted> 3 10 ms 13 ms 11 ms <redacted> 4 12 ms 10 ms 10 ms ae2-0.TPA01-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.199.82] 5 16 ms 16 ms 15 ms 0.ae4.XL2.MIA19.ALTER.NET [152.63.8.117] 6 14 ms 16 ms 16 ms 0.xe-11-0-0.GW1.MIA19.ALTER.NET [152.63.85.94] 7 19 ms 16 ms 16 ms microsoft-gw.customer.alter.net [63.65.188.170] 8 27 ms 33 ms * ge-5-3-0-0.ash-64cb-1a.ntwk.msn.net [207.46.46.177] 9 * * * Request timed out. 10 44 ms 43 ms 43 ms 207.46.37.235 11 42 ms 41 ms 40 ms 10.22.112.225 12 42 ms 43 ms 43 ms 10.175.9.1 13 42 ms 41 ms 42 ms 100.94.68.79 14 40 ms 40 ms 41 ms 100.94.80.193 15 * * * Request timed out.

  Read the article

• OpenVPN with MacOS X Client and same subnets in local and remote net.

  - by Daniel

  I have a homenetwork 192.168.1.0/24 with gteway 192.168.1.1 and a remote network with the same parameters. Now I want to create a OpenVPN tunnel between those networks. I have no problems with Windows, because Windows routes everything to 192.168.1.0/24 except 192.168.1.1 throught the tunnel. On MacOS X however I see the folling line in the Details window: 2010-05-10 09:13:01 WARNING: potential route subnet conflict between local LAN [192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0] and remote VPN [192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0] When I list the routes I get the following: Internet: Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Netif Expire default 192.168.1.1 UGSc 13 3 en1 127 localhost UCS 0 0 lo0 localhost localhost UH 12 3589 lo0 169.254 link#5 UCS 0 0 en1 192.168.1 link#5 UCS 1 0 en1 192.168.1.1 0:1e:e5:f4:ec:7f UHLW 13 17 en1 1103 192.168.1.101 localhost UHS 0 0 lo0 192.168.6 192.168.6.5 UGSc 0 0 tun0 192.168.6.5 192.168.6.6 UH 1 0 tun0 My Interfaces are en1 - My local Wifi network tun0 - The tunnel interface As can be seen from the routes above there is no entry for 192.168.1.0/24 that routes the traffic through the tunnel interface. When I manually route a single IP like 192.168.1.16 over the tunnel gateway 192.168.6.6, this works. Q: How do I set up my routes in MacOS X for the same behaviour as on windows, to route everything except 192.168.1.1 through the tunnel, but leave the default gateway to be my local 192.168.1.1 ?

  Read the article

• How to approach taking a very diverse hybrid network and making something lean and cohesive

  - by Gregg Leventhal

  I am going to have an opportunity (from the role of Linux Sysadmin) to work on optimizing a corporate server network that has a lot of different application servers from LAMP stacks to JBOSS to IIS based ASP/.NET systems of all sorts. I am interested to hear how you would approach evaluating and consolidating a network in a situation like this where you are walking in cold? What are some of your go-to techniques?

  Read the article

• pfSense router on a LAN with two gateways

  - by JohnCC

  I have a LAN with an ADSL modem/router on it. We have just gained an alternative high-speed internet connection at our location, and I want to connect the LAN to it, eventually dropping the ADSL. I've chosen to use a small PFSense box to connect the LAN to the new WAN connection. Two servers on the LAN run services accessible to the outside via NAT using the single ADSL WAN IP. We have DNS records which point to this IP. I want to do the same via the new connection, using the WAN IP there. That connection permits multiple IPs, so I have configured pfSense using virtual IP's, 1:1 NAT and appropriate firewall rules. When I change the servers' default gateway settings to the pfSense box, I can access the services via the new WAN IPs without a problem. However, I can no longer access them via the old WAN IP. If I set the servers' default gateway back to the ADSL router, then the opposite is true - I can access the services via the ADSL IP, but not via the new one. In the first case, I believe this is because an incoming SYN packet arrives at the ADSL WAN IP, and is NAT'd and sent to the internal IP of the server. The server responds with a SYN/ACK which it sends via its default gateway, the pfSense box. The pfSense box sees a SYN/ACK that it saw no SYN for and drops the packet. Is there any sensible way around this? I would like the services to be accessible via both IPs for a short period at least, since once I change the DNS it will take a while before everyone picks up the new address.

  Read the article

• Changing SPF (Sender Policy Framework) record for Google Apps

  - by bobo

  My boss asked me to set up Google Apps for a client and basically I have done everything including setting up MX records in DirectAdmin and re-creating the email accounts in Google Apps. I also sent a few test emails to ensure that it actually works and it seems fine. But then I discovered this article talking about changing the SPF record for the domain. http://www.google.com/support/a/bin/answer.py?answer=178723 After reading the introduction I think it would be better for me to change the SPF record according to this article. So I logged in to the DirectAdmin and navigated to the DNS management, and then I found that there's already a TXT SPF record there: v=spf1 a mx a:spf.cabin.com.hk include:gmail.com -all And it looks like it's already including gmail.com, but according to the article it should be: _spf.google.com rather than: gmail.com I dare not to change it before I understand what this record actually means. What would you do with this record if you were me?

  Read the article

• Blocking ICMP outgoing requests only in eth1

  - by Raj

  I am creating a NAT with iptables: Computer A: eth0 (dhcp) + eth1 (static ip 192.168.0.1 - gateway) Computer B: eth1 (static ip 192.168.0.2, using Computer A as gateway) I know how to block ICMP outgoing requests (-A OUTPUT -p icmp --icmp-type echo-request -j DROP), but that would block ICMP requests from Computer A, but not from Computer B (in fact, only for Computer A - Computer B can keep doing those). I tried with the same command, but adding -o eth1, but that does not block at all. Any idea?

  Read the article

• Isolate clients on same subnet?

  - by stefan.at.wpf

  Given n (e.g. 200) clients in a /24 subnet and the following network structure: client 1 \ . \ . switch -- firewall . / client n / (in words: all clients connected to one switch and the switch connected to the firewall) Now by default, e.g. client 1 and client n can communicate directly using the switch, without any packets ever arriving the firewall. Therefore none of those packets could be filtered. However I would like to filter the packets between the clients, therefore I want to disallow any direct communication between the clients. I know this is possible using vlans, but then - according to my understanding - I would have to put all clients in their own network. However I don't even have that much IP addresses: I have about 200 clients, only a /24 subnet and all clients shall have public ip addresses, therefore I can't just create a private network for each of them (well, maybe using some NAT, but I'd like to avoid that). So, is there any way to tell the switch: Forward all packets to the firewall, don't allow direct communication between clients? Thanks for any hint!

  Read the article

• Always use one slow connection in preference of a "faster" one

  - by billc.cn

  In Windows, there's this automatic metric thing where the metric is selected according to the declared speed of the link. I now have a gigabit LAN routed to a 2MB DSL service and a HSDPA mobile broadband connection. The former is always chosen for Internet packets even though the latter is actually faster. I tried setting the mobile broadband's interface metric to 1 and raising its priority in the advanced settings of the adapter settings, but this does not seem to affect the metric of the default route. The default route to the Ethernet interface always have a lower metric than the mobile broadband interface. Am I missing something here?

  Read the article

• pix 501, static route to d-link router (different subnet)

  - by ra170

  I have pix 501 cisco firewall with internal ip 192.168.10.1. I have connected d-link router (dir-655) to pix 501. The d-link router has internal ip 192.168.0.1 The picture would like something like that: |pix 501| has 192.168.10.1 ip |DIR-655| has 192.168.0.1 ip 1. |cable modem|----|pix 501|-------|DIR-655|-----PC 2. PC--------|pix 501|---------|DIR-655| | | |cable modem| When I'm on the wireless network (dir-655) with assigned ip of 192.168.0.x I can cross the subnet and connect to my firewall 192.168.10.1. (pic. 1) The problem is that if I'm on the 192.168.10.x network I can't connect to anything over at 192.168.0.x network. (pic.2) I've tried entering a static route like this: `route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1` I also tried assigning static ip to wan interface on DIR-655 to 192.168.10.30 and then tried this: route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.30 1 But still, can't connect to 192.168.0.1 or anything on that subnet. Is there a way to setup a static route? Would adding a separate router between PIX 501 and DIR-655 help? I would think that static route like this should take care of it, but it doesn't. This is my route config and nat: (config)# sh route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 (outside_IP) 1 DHCP static outside (outside_IP) 255.255.248.0 (outside_IP) 1 CONNECT static inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1 OTHER static inside 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1 CONNECT static or (route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.30 1) (config)# sh nat nat (inside) 1 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 nat (inside) 1 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 nat (inside) 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0 I ended up turning DIR-655 into an Access Point (turning off DHCP and pluging cable from PIX lan interface into one of the LAN interfaces on DIR-655, and leaving WAN port empty), that works as far as DIR-655 being on the same subnet now, and I can access every machine. However the question is, why can't I simply route between those two? would router between these two help? One of the reasons is, that the PIX 501 has only 10 licences, so now I'm using almost all of them. (I have few computers, iphones, ps3, print server, etc.) I would really appreciate some help! Thanks.

  Read the article

• Private IP getting routed over Internet

  - by WernerCD

  We are setting up an internal program, on an internal server that uses the private 172.30.x.x subnet... when we ping the address 172.30.138.2, it routes across the internet: C:\>tracert 172.30.138.2 Tracing route to 172.30.138.2 over a maximum of 30 hops 1 6 ms 1 ms 1 ms xxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.org [192.168.28.1] 2 * * * Request timed out. 3 12 ms 13 ms 9 ms xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxx.xx.xxx.xxxxxxx.net [68.85.xx.xx] 4 15 ms 11 ms 55 ms te-7-3-ar01.salisbury.md.bad.comcast.net [68.87.xx.xx] 5 13 ms 14 ms 18 ms xe-11-0-3-0-ar04.capitolhghts.md.bad.comcast.net [68.85.xx.xx] 6 19 ms 18 ms 14 ms te-1-0-0-4-cr01.denver.co.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.xx.xx] 7 28 ms 30 ms 30 ms pos-4-12-0-0-cr01.atlanta.ga.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.xx.xx] 8 30 ms 43 ms 30 ms 68.86.xx.xx 9 30 ms 29 ms 31 ms 172.30.138.2 Trace complete. This has a number of us confused. If we had a VPN setup, it wouldn't show up as being routed across the internet. If it hit an internet server, Private IP's (such as 192.168) shouldn't get routed. What would let a private IP address get routed across servers? would the fact that it's all comcast mean that they have their routers setup wrong?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65  | Next Page >