similar to: Wrong behaviour in policy routing

Hi! I have many problems getting this thing to work. There''s a host with two network interfaces, where there are two routers to Internet in two separated networks. The host uses multihop routing for deciding to which router send the packets... but the routing decision is wrong made. Some packets with source address of one NIC, go to other network. I have a host with three NICs in it:

Log report is reporting a lot of these lately.. following is just a short snippet from the beginning on one server. WARNING!!!! Possible Attack: Attempt from 104.29.broadband2.iol.cz [83.208.29.104] with: command=HELO/EHLO, count=3 : 1 Time(s) Attempt from 106.7.broadband7.iol.cz [88.102.7.106] with: command=HELO/EHLO, count=3 : 1 Time(s) Attempt from

Recently we began seeing lots of these log entries on our off-site mx smtp host. I have googled this but I am not clear from what I have read if this is something we can stop altogether or should even worry about. Comments? Logwatch. . . --------------------- sendmail Begin ------------------------ SMTP SESSION, MESSAGE, OR RECIPIENT ERRORS ------------------------------------------

That is what I thought, but just to clarify: I am using static dhcp hosts in the dhcpd.conf and our network config. is similar to this: 3 subnets 192.168.15.0/24 192.168.16.0/24 192.168.17.0/24 dhcpd.conf ### Global Settings for DHCP Services ### option domain-name="dom.com"; default-lease-time 900; max-lease-time 1800; ddns-update-style none; authoritative; allow bootp; allow

Hello Shorewall list, I''m a happy Shorewall user since a few years now and everything works fine for me except one thing that I try to implement since a week, the multi-isp. I''ve downloaded the 2.4.0 Stable release yesterday and tried the RC2 since a week. My config is a Debian running a kernel 2.4.27 home made with the CONNMARK.diff patch applied I''m using 2 ISP,

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8829 Summary: rsync -uav --delete --dry-run prints delete file list in reverse order Product: rsync Version: 3.0.9 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org

Hello! I have set up tunnel between a FreeBSD machine and Windows Vista. Tunnel is established, but when I try to ping either end ping fails. I have temporarily switched off firewalls on both machines, no luck. Here is client tinc.conf on Vista: Name = lenovo_client ConnectTo = lenovo_server Interface = tinctap Subnet = 10.20.40.0/24 Sevrer tinc.conf on FreeBSD: Device=/dev/tap0

Yeah....I think that every install I have done the first thing that happens is "why is there a delay before the call connects?" and the answer is "you have to hit dial or wait 10 seconds". -Jonathan -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Tom Rymes Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005

I would like to thank all the people who have contributed to this very fine project. Great work! I''ve encountered some strange results while examining the term frequency of one of my indexed documents. The indexed terms seem to vary for the very same document depending on the presence or absence of completely unrelated operations in the code, so the resulting term frequency changes, too.

I have a few questions. Asterisk is a windows program why each time I try to find out how communicate with my Panasonic TDA 100 or with TDE 100 always read "use one card o use a box" why I can't use simply my network card, in the other side of Panasonic exist two types of cards one in TDA 100 with 2 trunks and in the other side TDE have internal Two trunks too. Why if I want to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi folks, I currently use courier imapd, exim and ldap on my mail box. There are no users on this box, all info is taken from the ldap server. I note that dovecot does not use ldap as a backend, but curious if this in on the cards, or even mysql backend. Sean - -- Sean Rima http://www.tcob1.net Linux User:

hi, anybody know how to make a sip trunk between trixbox and panasonic kx tde 100? i've tried, but always failed when calling from trixbox to panasonic. thanks,,, -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20130312/1dd5170b/attachment.htm>

Hello, I am having big problems with Xen virtual network interfaces. First I tried typical bridge support, no luck. The packets sent from dom0 to domU seemed to disappear somewhere. Then, to debug the problem I have set up a simple point-to-point link and still have the same problem. I am using Xen 3.0.4-1 and Linux 2.6.16.x in both dom0 and domU. I have tried kernel 2.6.16.35 and 2.6.16.41. I

Minutes Attending: imcleod, lars_kurth, gwd, kbsingh, dcaro, jonludlam Meetings over Christmas: - Skip the one on 30 Dec; do IRC meeting Jan 13th. Xen update - 4.4.1, libvirt pushed - Notes: xend disabled by default - Plan: Sign, release soon, oVirt - RHEL 7.1 will already rebuild qemu with snapshotting on - But we may want to do the qemu rebuild for 6 as well. - kbsingh: I think oVirt

There has been numerous threads etc regarding this but all that has left me is more than a little confused :-(. I have setup and environment consisting of two OpenVPN tunnels and wish to load balance at the packet level between them. I am currently running on Linux edm 2.4.21-20.EL.c0custom #2 Tue Oct 12 08:52:23 BST 2004 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux And have install Quagga at each end to provide

Hi! I''m still trying to solve the problem, about which I already posted in these lists... I''ve been trying to understand where packet routing and NAT is being done. The schemes are quite clear, when it''s about the _first_ packet of a NAT connection (when it enters the NAT table). But it isn''t that clear about the packets NAT''ed by the connection

On 02/02/2016 09:28 AM, Jonathan Billings wrote: > CentOS is not a bleeding-edge distribution that constantly keeps > packages up to date with the upstream projects. If you want that, try > another distribution like Fedora. <rant> GNOME can get a rebase to a newer version, but KDE can't..... this from a former KDE user who would love to go back to KDE but refuses to deal with

On 02/02/16 12:02, H wrote: > On 02/02/2016 03:50 PM, Lamar Owen wrote: >> On 02/02/2016 09:28 AM, Jonathan Billings wrote: >>> CentOS is not a bleeding-edge distribution that constantly keeps >>> packages up to date with the upstream projects. If you want that, try >>> another distribution like Fedora. >> <rant> >> GNOME can get a rebase to a

On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 18:02, H wrote: > On 02/02/2016 03:50 PM, Lamar Owen wrote: >> On 02/02/2016 09:28 AM, Jonathan Billings wrote: >> > CentOS is not a bleeding-edge distribution that constantly keeps >> > packages up to date with the upstream projects. If you want that, try >> > another distribution like Fedora. >> <rant> >> GNOME can

Hello list! When em0 has an inet address while bridge0 doesn't, it seems to be OK: ----- bs1% uname -a FreeBSD bs1.sp34.ru 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #0: Sun May 25 20:15:26 MSD 2008 root@bs1.sp34.ru:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/BSM i386 bs1% ifconfig em0; ifconfig tap0; ifconfig bridge0 em0: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500