Search Results

Search found 1671 results on 67 pages for 'packets'.

Page 58/67 | < Previous Page | 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65  | Next Page >

• Access server using IP on another interface

  - by Markos

  I am using Windows Server 2012 instead of a router for my home network. Currently I am using RRAS and computers from local network can access Internet correctly. Here is a map of the current setup: [PC1] ---| |---- (lan ip)[Server](wan ip)--> internet [PC2] ---| I have applications running on Server, such as IIS and others. All can be accessed from internet using wan ip and from lan using lan ip. I have a domain, lets say its my-domain.com, which is resolved to my wan ip. What I want is to enable my LAN computers to be able to connect to services on my server using the very same address as internet users: eg http://my-domain.com/. However this does not work for my lan computers. What I understand is that I need to set up some kind of loopback route in a way that packets comming to LAN interface get routed to WAN interface. But I haven't found how to achieve this (in fact, I don't know WHAT to search for). Feel free to ask for additional informations and I will try to update the question.

  Read the article

• Debian Stable: Can't update kernel, libc won't update.

  - by pascal

  I use Debian Stable (squeeze) on a virtual host where I can't touch the kernel, it's stuck (and will be for some time as support told me) at Linux 2.6.18-028stab070.3 #1 SMP Wed Jul 21 18:33:27 MSD 2010 x86_64 So when I try to update, several packages fail with FATAL: kernel too old for example Preparing to replace libgcc1 1:4.6.0-11 (using .../libgcc1_1%3a4.6.1-1_amd64.deb) ... Unpacking replacement libgcc1 ... Setting up libgcc1 (1:4.6.1-1) ... FATAL: kernel too old Segmentation fault dpkg: error processing libgcc1 (--configure): subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 139 and some version chaos ensued: The following packages have unmet dependencies: libc-dev-bin : Depends: libc6 (> 2.13) but 2.11.2-13 is installed libc6 : Depends: libc-bin (= 2.11.2-13) but 2.13-5 is installed libc6-dev : Depends: libc6 (= 2.13-5) but 2.11.2-13 is installed libquadmath0 : Depends: gcc-4.6-base (= 4.6.0-2) but 4.6.0-11 is installed libstdc++6 : Depends: gcc-4.6-base (= 4.6.0-2) but 4.6.0-11 is installed locales : Depends: glibc-2.13-1 What should I do? I want to keep the system up-to-date, so I want to pin as few packets as possible, but I also don't want to have to compile anything manually. Trying to pin the status quo and figured out where the error came from: ldconfig segfaults. -v doesn't print anything more so I can't tell what's the actual problem. # ldconfig FATAL: kernel too old

  Read the article

• tc u32 --- how to match L2 protocols in recent kernels?

  - by brownian

  I have a nice shaper, with hashed filtering, built at a linux bridge. In short, br0 connects external and internal physical interfaces, VLAN tagged packets are bridged "transparently" (I mean, no VLAN interfaces are there). Now, different kernels do it differently. I can be wrong with exact kernel verions ranges, please forgive me. Thanks. 2.6.26 So, in debian, 2.6.26 and up (up to 2.6.32, I believe) --- this works: tc filter add dev internal protocol 802.1q parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 ht 1:64 match ip dst 192.168.1.100 flowid 1:200 Here, "kernel" matches two bytes in "protocol" field with 0x8100, but counts the beginning of ip packet as a "zero position" (sorry for my English, if I'm a bit unclear). 2.6.32 Again, in debian (I've not built vanilla kernel), 2.6.32-5 --- this works: tc filter add dev internal protocol 802.1q parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 ht 1:64 match ip dst 192.168.1.100 at 20 flowid 1:200 Here, "kernel" matches the same for protocol, but counts offset from the beginning of this protocol's header --- I have to add 4 bytes to offset (20, not 16 for dst address). It's ok, seems more logical, as for me. 3.2.11, the latest stable now This works --- as if there is no 802.1q tag at all: tc filter add dev internal protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 ht 1:64 match ip dst 192.168.1.100 flowid 1:200 The problem is that I couldn't find a way to match 802.1q tag so far. Matching 802.1q tag at past I could do this before as follows: tc filter add dev internal protocol 802.1q parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 match u16 0x0ed8 0x0fff at -4 flowid 1:300 Now I'm unable to match 802.1q tag with at 0, at -2, at -4, at -6 or like that. The main issue that I have zero hits count --- this filter is not being checked at all, "wrong protocol", in other words. Please, anyone, help me :-) Thanks!

  Read the article

• Virtualizing an Inline network appliance with VirtualBox (or VMWare)

  - by Tzury Bar Yochay

  My device, which is a Linux based IP in-liner is transparent to the network peripherals, that is, no IP address assigned to any of its interfaces. For the sake of the conversation, let's use ADSL connection as an example, while the device is inspecting the bi-directional traffic, the network is behaving same as if device was not there, attached to the wire (see Physical setup at the attached diagram). I wonder if I can enclosed that "device" within a Windows machine and have it operated virtually so it still seats inline between the ADSL router and the Windows netwroking interface by using virtual NICs, (or whatever their name is in windows), and inspecting the traffic, same as if it was on a separate physical device, the drawing under "Virtual Setup" in the attached diagram show what I am trying to achieve. Reading a bit on the VirtualBox docs, seems like binding the right side is relatively simple, perhaps I should have one network adapter set as Bridge Networking and VirtualBox will connect it to the physical NIC on the host machine, and network packets are exchanged directly, circumventing the host operating system's network stack (WinXP in my case). However, I have no idea how to achieve the left side of my diagram, which requires adding virtual NICs to windows and configure them correctly in a way to make that pipeline possible. I would appreciate any help. by the way, if that is not possible with VirtualBox but with other virtualization solution (e.g. VMWare), I would accept the other as well.

  Read the article

• Measure Upload Speed between a client and our server

  - by tresstylez

  We host a SAAS application specially customized for multiple clients. For one customer in particular -- they are reporting sporadic performance issues from various locations on their network, in particular UPLOADING documents through a form on our website. The client claims they have "bandwidth to spare" and that utilization of their "pipe" is so low that it MUST be our application, but our application has MANY clients and all features are working fine for all other clients. Interestingly enough -- DOWNLOADS (ie. just accessing the website, or downloading documents) is working fine. Speed test shows that they should get 1.2Mbps UP. So, a 3MB file should take 20 secs to upload. It takes 60+ seconds on their network. Sometimes even small files take OVER 10 minutes to upload or they timeout. Pings and Traceroutes don't show any abnormally long hops or response times. They claim other SAAS applications they use allow them to upload just fine. Both IT teams are working together to resolve this issue. What kind of data can I request from the clients to begin ruling things out. Seems like we need to somehow measure LATENCY of the networks involved or even at the switch level, we need to understand if packets are getting dropped somewhere and why. Where should I start? Any help is appreciated. I'll provide more info upon requests

  Read the article

• TCP dies on a Linux laptop

  - by Roman Cheplyaka

  Once in several days I have the following problem. My laptop (Debian GNU/Linux testing) suddenly becomes unable to work with TCP connections to the internet. The following things continue to work fine: UDP (DNS), ICMP (ping) — I get instant response TCP connections to other machines in the local network (e.g. I can ssh to a neighbour laptop) everything is ok for other machines in my LAN But when I try TCP connections from my laptop, they time out (no response to SYN packets). Here's a typical curl output: % curl -v google.com * About to connect() to google.com port 80 (#0) * Trying 173.194.39.105... * Connection timed out * Trying 173.194.39.110... * Connection timed out * Trying 173.194.39.97... * Connection timed out * Trying 173.194.39.102... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.98... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.96... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.103... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.99... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.101... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.104... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.100... * Timeout * Trying 2a00:1450:400d:803::1009... * Failed to connect to 2a00:1450:400d:803::1009: Network is unreachable * Success * couldn't connect to host * Closing connection #0 curl: (7) Failed to connect to 2a00:1450:400d:803::1009: Network is unreachable Restarting the connection and/or reloading the network card kernel module doesn't help. The only thing that helps is reboot. Clearly something is wrong with my system (everything else works fine), but I have no idea what exactly. I don't know how to reproduce this, but as I said, it happens every several days. My setup is a wireless router that is connected to the ISP via PPPoE. Any advice?

  Read the article

• pdns-recursor allocates resources to non-existing queries

  - by azzid

  I've got a lab-server running pdns-recursor. I set it up to experiment with rate limiting, so it has been resolving requests openly from the whole internet for weeks. My idea was that sooner or later it would get abused, giving me a real user case to experiment with. To keep track of the usage I set up nagios to monitor the number of concurrent-queries to the server. Today I got notice from nagios that my specified limit had been reached. I logged in to start trimming away the malicious questions I was expecting, however, when I started looking at it I couldn't see the expected traffic. What I found is that even though I have over 20 concurrent-queries registered by the server I see no requests in the logs. The following command describes the situation well: $ sudo rec_control get concurrent-queries; sudo rec_control top-remotes 22 Over last 0 queries: How can there be 22 concurrent-queries when the server has 0 queries registered? EDIT: Figured it out! To get top-remotes working I needed to set ################################# # remotes-ringbuffer-entries maximum number of packets to store statistics for # remotes-ringbuffer-entries=100000 It defaults to 0 storing no information to base top-remotes statistics on.

  Read the article

• Manual NAT on Checkpoint (Redirect all http requests to a local web server)

  - by B. Kulakli

  We have a proxy server in our internal network and I want to redirect all internet http requests to a web server in local network. It'll be like a Network Billboard that says "No direct connection is available. Set up your proxy etc." For example: A user starts the computer Opens the browser Tries to open www.google.com Should see web server output on local network Tries another web site on internet Should see web server output on local network Sets up proxy Tries to connect to a web site Web site should be loaded I have added a simple manual NAT rule to address translation in Checkpoint firewall but it simply does not work. Here is my address translation rule Source Destination Service T.Source T.Destination T.Service MY_PC A_GOOGLE_IP ALL ORIGINAL INT_WEB_SRV ORIGINAL Then when I ping A_GOOGLE_IP, replies come from INT_WEB_SRV, as I expected. However, when I try to connect A_GOOGLE_IP from browser (http://A_GOOGLE_IP), no replies come from SYN_SENT and falls into timeout. When I look at the firewall log of INT_WEB_SRV, I can see the incoming connection requests from MY_PC is accepted and NO denies. By the way, there is no problem to see INT_WEB_SRV (http://INT_WEB_SRV) from browser. My understanding is, my NAT rule at checkpoint NGX R60 does not include return packets. I definitely need some help.

  Read the article

• Routing / binding 128 IPs to one server

  - by Andrew

  I have a Ubuntu server with 128 ip's (static external ips 86.xx.xx.16), and I want to crawl pages thru different ip's. The gateway is xx.xxx.xxx.1, the main ip is xx.xxx.xxx.16, and the other 128 ip's are xx.xxx.xxx.129/255. I tried this configuration in /etc/network/interfaces but I doesn't work. It work if I remove the gateway for the aliases eth0:0 and eth0:1. I think this is routing problem. auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto eth0 auto eth0:0 auto eth0:1 iface eth0 inet static address xx.xxx.xxx.16 netmask 255.255.255.128 gateway xx.xxx.xxx.1 iface eth0:0 inet static address xx.xxx.xxx.129 netmask 255.255.255.128 gateway xx.xxx.xxx.1 iface eth0:1 inet static address xx.xxx.xxx.130 netmask 255.255.255.128 gateway xx.xxx.xxx.1 Also, please tell me how to "reset" every changes that I made in networking and routing. Update: I removed the gateway and now it works. I can reach the website thru all 128 ip's. But when I try to bind a socket connection in php to a specific ip I get no answer. socket_bind($sock, "xx.xxx.xx.xxx"); socket_connect($sock, 'google.com', 80); I tryed to use a sniffer to see the packets, and I see the packet sent from binded ip to google.com but the "connection" can't be established. I don't know anything about "route" command, but I have a feeling that this is the solution.

  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

• Configure linux machine as bridge/switch and end device

  - by leemes

  At my home, I have two desktop PCs in two rooms. The router / DSL modem is in one of these rooms. Now I want to configure a home server (having 2 LAN ports, running 24/7) in the corridor between the two rooms, using only one LAN cable at each door. This gives me the following physical configuration: (door) (door) .----/-/----. .-----/-/----------._ FritzBox | | | .----´´ DSL Router PC1 Server | PC2 As just said, the server has 2 network interfaces and is running Ubuntu. What I need now is a network configuration which enables both the server and PC1 to connect to the router. I think the server needs to serve as a bridge or switch. Currently, all computers are configured having static IP addresses. If I'm understanding it correctly, a bridge / switch doesn't have its own IP address, but as the server needs to be configured as an own end device, it needs to have one. My first question is, do I have to configure both interfaces separately, giving both the same static IP address? My next question is, how do I bridge the two physical networks into one? I have basic understanding (but am always confused again and again) of bridges and switches, but I don't know how to configure it in software. I only know that it's possible to do so :) The third question is: Is it possible to configure this in a way that network packets from/to PC1 to/from the router only go through hardware or only consume low CPU in the server? Can you help me? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• How can I make IPv6 on OpenVPN work using a tap device?

  - by Lekensteyn

  I've managed to setup OpenVPN for full IPv4 connectivity using tap0. Now I want to do the same for IPv6. Addresses and network setup (note that my real prefix is replaced by 2001:db8): 2001:db8::100:0:0/96 my assigned IPv6 range 2001:db8::100:abc:0/112 OpenVPN IPv6 range 2001:db8::100:abc:1 tap0 server side (set as gateway on client) 2001:db8::100:abc:2 tap0 client side 2001:db8::1:2:3:4 gateway for server Home laptop (tap0: 2001:db8::100:abc:2/112 gateway 2001:db8::100:abc:1/112) | | | (running Kubuntu 10.10; OpenVPN 2.1.0-3ubuntu1) | wifi | | router | | OpenVPN INTERNET | eth0 | /tap0 VPS (eth0:2001:db8::1:2:3:4/64 gateway 2001:db8::1) (tap0: 2001:db8::100:abc:1/112) (running Debian 6; OpenVPN 2.1.3-2) The server has both native IPv4 and IPv6 connectivity, the client has only IPv4. I can ping6 to and from my server over OpenVPN, but not to other machines (for example, ipv6.google.com). Using tcpdump on both the server and client, I can see that packets are actually transferred over tap0 to eth0. The router (2001:db8::1) send a neighbor solicitation for the client (2001:db8::100:abc:2) to eth0 after it receives the ICMP6 echo-request. The server does not respond to that solicitation, which causes the ICMP6 echo-request not be routed to the destination. How can I make this IPv6 connection work?

  Read the article

• ssh works fine when using public interface, but slow when using private interface

  - by Kevin M

  My Linux(UbuntuEEE) to Linux(CentOS) ssh takes a long time to log in(~15 seconds) when using the private interface, but not when using the public one. I have a Linux box acting as my router. As such, it has multiple interfaces(75.xxx.xxx.xxx, 192.168.1.1). I can ssh in from the internal interface(192.168.1.65 to .1), but it will take a while. I can ssh into the public address, and it goes quickly(~1 second). I have another box that I can ssh into the inside interface from and it goes quickly. iptables is set to accept packets coming into the interface immediately. sshd's UseDNS is normally on; I get the same problem if I turn it off and restart sshd. I normally use public-key authentication; I have done a mv ~/.ssh/ ~/ssh/ and it will ask me for a password after going slowly. After logging in(using either interface), speed is quick. ssh client version(via ssh -v):OpenSSH_4.7p1 Debian-8ubuntu1.2, OpenSSL 0.9.8g 19 Oct 2007 ssh server version(via rpm -qv openssh_server):openssh-server-4.3p2-29.el5

  Read the article

• Server 2003 and XP Client; Why are HTTP connections being silently dropped.

  - by Asa Yeamans

  On my network, my edge-router, a windows 2003 r2 server router with all the latest updates, will drop packets, but only under specific circumstances. I have troubleshot and isolated it down to the most simple configuration i can. There is NO NAT involved. Only fully-public IP addresses. No Firewalls are running either, all ahve been disabled. no packet filters on any interfaces anywhere either. I have a single Windows XP virtual machine and my edge-router(the windows 2003 r2 server, and also a virtual machine) running on a windows 2008 x64 r2 system (running virtual server 2005 as i dont have Intel-VT compatible chip yet). The edge router can access any external http site just fine, no issues. However the windows XP machine is only able to access certain sites. These work: www.google.com www.txstate.edu www.workintexas.com www.thedailywtf.com . These Dont: www.yahoo.com www.utexas.edu en.wikipedia.org slashdot.org www.bing.com. I have removed all possibility of DNS issues by connecting with net-cat from the XP box and sending GET /\r\nHost: \r\n\r\n and that connection replicates the issue as well. The network setup: My statically assigned IP block: x.x.x.168/29 DSL Modem -----PPPoE Connection---- x.x.x.169[EdgeRouter] [EdgeRouter]x.x.x.170 -----Virtual Ethernet----- x.x.x.174 [Test2] Test2's Default gateway is x.x.x.170 and test2 can ping any and every valid, accessible, public IP address with no packet loss what-so-ever. If i connect directly over PPPoE from test2 (the XP box) everything works just fine... Im at my wits end, i have NO IDEA whats causing this.

  Read the article

• Puzzling TCP performance over 3G / UMTS

  - by lemonsqueeze

  I'm using 3G as my primary internet connection, and TCP over this thing is getting more puzzling every day. For example: Downloading from kernel.org is crazy fast: $wget http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.0/linux-3.6.8.tar.bz2 increases to ~500kB/s after a few secs ! Some servers are incredibly slow, for instance www.graphic-pc.com:Same thing, downloading a big file with wget it starts at ~30kB/s for a split second, then collapses to 5-10k or even worse. Web browsing is decent but somewhat unreliable. Randomly, a page will take really long to load or even fail to load, but a reload can succeed almost immediately. Now, by chance i started playing with OpenVPN over UDP on top of the 3G connection, and OMG suddenly everything's extremely fast !Same www.graphic-pc.com now shoots at 100-200kB/s ! What's going on here ??? How come it is so much better with the VPN than without ?? And why does graphic-pc.com crawl when kernel.org flies ?Something to do with my tcp stack (or the server), or some buggy router in between ?? Notes: Setup is laptop running Ubuntu Lucid and a Huawei 3G dongle (So direct pppd connection). I can reproduce this pretty much any time during the day and I'm not moving, so it's clearly not cell environment or internet congestion. (although kernel.org without VPN sometimes does worse in the evening, 60kB or so - but still 500kB with VPN !) For 2) wireshark shows retransmitted packets, dup ack's, even out of order sometimes. I've tried playing with different /proc/sys/net/ipv4 parameters (tcp_rmem, window_scaling, tcp_congestion...) doesn't seem to make a difference. Update: Tried under windows 7 (no VPN) with some interesting results: tcp settings : default tcp_optimizer kernel.org : 10 kB/s 20 kB/s graphic-pc.com: 8 kB/s 70 kB/s ! tcp_optimizer turned on ctcp among other things. Have to check what os graphic-pc.com is running, my bet is linux's tcp_westwood and ms ctcp don't mix well here...

  Read the article

• Juniper router dropping pings to external interface

  - by Alexander Garden

  My organization has a Juniper SSG20-WLAN that routes our traffic to the outside world. We've been having intermittent problems with our internet connection so I wrote up a Python script to ping the internal interface of the router, the external interface, a couple of our internal servers, the ISP router our router talks to, their upstream provider, and Google and Yahoo for good measure. It does that about every minute. What I have found is that when our internet goes out, our Juniper router ceases responding to pings on the external interface. Everything past that is, of course, unreachable. The internal interface and our internal servers continue to echo back without interruption. None of the counters indicate dropped packets of any type. They all look normal. The logs complain about VIP servers being unavailable but otherwise nothing indicative of network issues. My questions are these: Does this exonerate our ISP? Or, contrawise, might a problem with the connection be causing the external interface to go down? Is there somewhere else in the SSG20, beside the system log and counters, that might help me track down info on the problem? UPDATE: Turned out that one of the switches between my monitoring box and the router was a router itself, and occasionally diverting from the gateway to itself. Kudos to those who made suggestions along those lines. Not really sure which answer to mark as accepted, as it was really stuff in the comments that turned out to be right. Thanks for the suggestions.

  Read the article

• Apache Virtual Hosts behind Cisco Router

  - by Theo

  I'm setting up an Apache 2.2 Ubuntu web server for internal services that is also supposed to be accessed from outside our LAN. Our LAN has a single external IP that is the external IP of our RV042 Cisco router. We have set up several A records on our external DNS server that point to this IP. Our internal DNS server resolve the same records to the internal IP of our web server, so computers from inside the network can access them using the same address as if they were outside. We forwarded the router's external 80 port to our web server's 80 port. I have set up one Virtual Host for each domain name in our list, and my httpd.conf is something like this: ServerName web.domain.com NameVirtualHost *:80 <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName alfresco.domain.com <Proxy *> Order deny,allow Allow from all </Proxy> ProxyPass /alfresco http://localhost:8080/alfresco ProxyPassReverse /alfresco http://localhost:8080/alfresco ProxyPass /share http://localhost:8080/share ProxyPassReverse /share http://localhost:8080/share </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName crm.domain.com DocumentRoot /var/www/sugarcrm </VirtualHost> Now, this works if we are in our LAN. However, if we are outside of our LAN we reach our web server's default page saying: It Works! This is the default web page for this server. But we can't reach the virtual hosts, as if the domain name is not being preserved when the router forward the packets to the web server. Am I doing something wrong? How can I check what is going on? What should be the settings to make this work from outside?

  Read the article

• How can I setup OpenVPN with IPv4 and IPv6 using a tap device?

  - by Lekensteyn

  I've managed to setup OpenVPN for full IPv4 connectivity using tap0. Now I want to do the same for IPv6. Addresses and network setup (note that my real prefix is replaced by 2001:db8): 2001:db8::100:0:0/96 my assigned IPv6 range 2001:db8::100:abc:0/112 OpenVPN IPv6 range 2001:db8::100:abc:1 tap0 (on server) (set as gateway on client) 2001:db8::100:abc:2 tap0 (on client) 2001:db8::1:2:3:4 gateway for server Home laptop (tap0: 2001:db8::100:abc:2/112 gateway 2001:db8::100:abc:1/112) | | | (running Kubuntu 10.10; OpenVPN 2.1.0-3ubuntu1) | wifi | | router | | OpenVPN INTERNET | eth0 | /tap0 VPS (eth0:2001:db8::1:2:3:4/64 gateway 2001:db8::1) (tap0: 2001:db8::100:abc:1/112) (running Debian 6; OpenVPN 2.1.3-2) The server has both native IPv4 and IPv6 connectivity, the client has only IPv4. I can ping6 to and from my server over OpenVPN, but not to other machines (for example, ipv6.google.com). net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding is set to 1, I've tried disabling net.ipv6.conf.all.accept_ra as well, without luck. Using tcpdump on both the server and client, I can see that packets are actually transferred over tap0 to eth0. The router (2001:db8::1) send a neighbor solicitation for the client (2001:db8::100:abc:2) to eth0 after it receives the ICMP6 echo-request. The server does not respond to that solicitation, which causes the ICMP6 echo-request not be routed to the destination. How can I make this IPv6 connection work?

  Read the article

• Manual NAT on Checkpoint (Redirect all http requests to a local web server)

  - by kulakli

  Hi, We have a proxy server in internal network and I want to redirect all internet http requests to a web server in local network. It'll be like a Network Billboard that say "No direct connection is available. Set up your proxy etc." For example: A user starts the computer Opens the browser Trys to open www.google.com Should see web server output on local network Trys another web site on internet Should see web server output on local network Sets up proxy Trys to connect to a web site Web site should be loaded I have added a simple manual NAT rule to address translation in Checkpoint firewall but it simply does not work. Here is my address translation rule Source Destination Service T.Source T.Destination T.Service MY_PC A_GOOGLE_IP ALL ORIGINAL INT_WEB_SRV ORIGINAL Then when I ping A_GOOGLE_IP, replies come from INT_WEB_SRV, as I expected. However, when I try to connect A_GOOGLE_IP from browser (http://A_GOOGLE_IP), No replies come from SYN_SENT and falls into timeout. When I look at the firewall log of INT_WEB_SRV, I can see the incoming connection requests from MY_PC is accepted and NO denies. By the way, there is no problem to see INT_WEB_SRV (http://INT_WEB_SRV) from browser. My understanding is, my nat rule at checkpoint NGX R60 does not include return packets. I definitely need some help. Regards, Burak

  Read the article

• VMWare use of Gratuitous ARP REPLY

  - by trs80

  I have an ESXi cluster that hosts several Windows Server VMs and around 30 Windows workstation VMs. Packet captures show a high number of ARP replies of the form: -sender_ip: VM IP -sender_mac: VM virtual MAC -target_ip: 0.0.0.0 -target_mac: Switch interface MAC The specific addresses aren't really a concern -- they're all legitimate and we're not having any problems with communications (most of the questions surrounding GARP and VMWare have to do with ping issues, a problem we don't have). I'm looking for an explanation of the traffic pattern in an environment that functions as expected. So the question is why would I see a high number of unsolicited ARP replies? Is this a mechanism VMWare uses for some purpose? What is it? Is there an alternative? EDIT: Quick diagram: [esxi]--[switch vlan]--[inline IDS]--[fw]--(rest of network) The IDS is complaining about these unsolicited ARPs. Several IDS vendors trigger on ARP replies without a prior request, or for ARP replies that have a target IP of 0.0.0.0. The target MAC in these replies is the VLAN interface on the switch. Capture points: -The IDS grabs the offending packets -The FW can see the same ones -A VM on the ESXi host does not see these, although there is an ARP request for a specific IP on the ESXi host that has source_ip=0.0.0.0 and source_mac=[switch vlan interface]. I can't share the captures, unfortunately. Really I'm interested in finding out if this is normal for an ESXi deployment.

  Read the article

• Access server using IP on another interface

  - by Markos

  I am using Windows Server 2012 instead of a router for my home network. Currently I am using RRAS and computers from local network can access Internet correctly. Here is a map of the current setup: [PC1] ---| |---- (lan ip)[Server](wan ip)--> internet [PC2] ---| I have applications running on Server, such as IIS and others. All can be accessed from internet using wan ip and from lan using lan ip. I have a domain, lets say its my-domain.com, which is resolved to my wan ip. What I want is to enable my LAN computers to be able to connect to services on my server using the very same address as internet users: eg http://my-domain.com/. However this does not work for my lan computers. What I understand is that I need to set up some kind of loopback route in a way that packets comming to LAN interface get routed to WAN interface. But I haven't found how to achieve this (in fact, I don't know WHAT to search for). Feel free to ask for additional informations and I will try to update the question.

  Read the article

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

  - by IndigoFire

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

  Read the article

• 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

• Can't ping localhost/or reach locally hosted domain

  - by Ian

  I can't reach a locally hosted domain, and in testing I have discovered I can't ping localhost or the actual IP either. OS is Windows7 64bit, Pro. DNS works, I can ping others on my network, they can ping me, and they can reach the hosted domain. The ONLY problem I have found is that I can't reach the locally hosted domains! C:\Users\ianipconfig /all Windows IP Configuration Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : leda Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Hybrid IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : hcs Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : hcs Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Atheros AR8121/AR8113/AR8114 PCI-E Ethern et Controller Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-23-54-7C-E2-2A DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.12(Preferred) Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1 NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled Ethernet adapter VirtualBox Host-Only Network #2: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : Description . . . . . . . . . . . : VirtualBox Host-Only Ethernet Adapter #2 Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 08-00-27-00-88-4A DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration IPv4 Address. . : 169.254.205.215(Preferred) Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.0.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled C:\Users\ianping localhost Pinging leda [127.0.0.1] with 32 bytes of data: Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Ping statistics for 127.0.0.1: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss), C:\Users\ianping coachmaster.leda.hcs Pinging coachmaster.leda.hcs [192.168.0.12] with 32 bytes of data: Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Ping statistics for 192.168.0.12: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss), C:\Users\ian I can reach a hosted VM in VirtualBox and the VM can browse the hosted sites. I've removed Zone Alarm and disabled Windows Firewall - same results. So how can I browse my locally hosted sited? What could be blocking it? Thanks Ian

  Read the article

• Looking for a small, portable, port-mirroring ethernet switch.

  - by user37244

  I recently had a mac go haywire, taking half a minute or more to get www.google.com loaded. Getting its owner to give up the machine for repair was like pulling teeth - they were insisting that it must be something to do with the network, since so much had changed with the local configuration at about the same time their box went haywire. I eventually set up a port mirror to a box that I could remote to so I could show that the mac was only irregularly getting packets onto the network. Demonstrating this faced an additional challenge: the latency of the remote desktop software I was using meant that I had to point to timestamps instead of just the moment the packet flashed up on the screen as my evidence. This particular user was the reason this was so challenging this time around, but I would like to have a box that I can cart from desk to desk to use wireshark on my laptop at any station where I need it. 3com, cisco, netgear, etc. (ad nauseum), all make switches that can be configured for port mirroring, but in my case, the smaller, the better. For the sake of my sanity, I'll probably end up running it off a battery anyway. If my laptop had two ethernet ports, this would be easy. So, whaddya recommand for a device that requires 0 configuration at each powerup (though I'm fine with poking at it for a while to set it up initially.) Small, light, and cheap enough to get it past purchasing? Thanks,

  Read the article

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