similar to: virsh esx return "error: internal error: Could not find Datacenter"

Hi A datacenter I use provides mountable nfs shares that are provided through a subnet, the only person having access to the nfs share is me. If I do this: mount -t nfs 192.168.53.21:/USERNAME /mnt/share/ then I get the share: [root at hostname /mnt/share] #>ls -la total 12 drwxrwxrwx 2 nfsnobody nfsnobody 4096 Oct 9 18:04 . drwxr-xr-x 7 root root 4096 Oct 9 17:55 ..

Sorry to bump this one... Anyone have any other ideas on it? Regards Steven Davison Net Technial Solutions -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Steven Davison Sent: 21 January 2010 08:41 To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Call Xfer issue

[This email is either empty or too large to be displayed at this time]

Hi List, This is my first posting, hopefully you guys dont mind for my newbie questions that I''m gonna post. And please excuse my English :) First of all let me explain my current situation. My servers are hosted in a datacenter with currently 6IP''s address assigned to me by my ISP. Each of the servers has its own internet IP address which the servers are running on Web server

so I gave up on bonding. I found about 300 posts showing eth0 and eth1 both pointing to br0 (bridge) as interfaces. I followed them correctly, or so I thought. I pointed both ethx to the bridge, restarted network and bam...!!! entire ip block went out. when I called datacenter they told me the router was under attack and I was like 'uh oh' and told them to just shut off my computer I

Hi, I am running a Asterisk 1.6 box in our Data Centre, and have a number of users connecting to that box, as their PBX. Calls in and out work fine, as does voicemail. The PBX at the Data Centre has an External IP, Nat?d to it by the firewall, and the relevant ports are open. The Office users have a dedicated internet connection for the phone lines, and calls are seen to traverse this

Hi, New here... I would like to setup shorewall on a dedicated box protecting a mutiple web, mail and dns server in the datacenter. All the ip address will be public ip (No LAN setup). I would also like to do traffic shaping and install Snort as well in the same box. Can Shorewall do all this? Is there any docs on that? Do i need to configure Shorewall as a bridging firewall in order to do

Hello all, I am looking to run only 1 VM on this setup, don''t need to do live migration, although that would be nice, I just want to protect against hardware and datacenter/network failure. The VM is lightly loaded, not much disk I/O or CPU load. I have two machines, each one with 2 x SATA 250GB, and 1 SSD 128GB. (There is a simple RAID-1 SATA hardware controller on board). I am

Hi Everyone, Does anyone know of any ATAs that can do proxy failover without using SRV. I don't want to rely on dns if at all possible. Basically, I have Asterisk boxes in two different data centers and I need ATAs to be able to uses the server at DC2 if DC1 goes down. The servers are already in a HA setup at each datacenter. I am looking for added protection if one of the datacenters

On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:24:55PM -0500, John Griessen wrote: > I've not really dug into testing tinc yet, but if you all will humor me in an uneducated blast of questions, > I'd appreciate it. > > What can you do to keep tinc going if your high availability comes from cluster nodes being dispensable? > Can tinc run on the cluster nodes? > That seems like chicken/egg

I still stuck with these errors packet_write_wait: Connection to 192.168.10.43 port 22: Broken pipe rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (534132435 bytes received so far) [receiver] rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code 12) at io.c(605) [receiver=3.0.9] rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (27198 bytes received so far) [generator] rsync error: unexplained error (code 255) at

Note that if you do this you are stuck with --whole-file On 03/25/2018 04:36 PM, Dan Stromberg via rsync wrote: > You could try using an automounter, like autofs, in combination with > sshfs. It'll be slower, possibly a lot slower, but it should be more > reliable over an unreliable connection. > > I've been using: > remote

If reducing the MTU is helping, you might look into turning on Path MTU Discovery. NFS can be fast for large transfers if you tune it. http://stromberg.dnsalias.org/~strombrg/nfs-test.html NFS is not terribly secure though - at least v2 and v3 weren't. Not sure about v4. On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:59 AM, Marc Roos via rsync <rsync at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > Kevin, Dan,

Hmmm, looks indeed like changing the mtu helps, strange thing is that with the bigger mtu sometimes I had no problems and often TB are copied without problems. Problem is I can't test the connection that much because the connection has been established by a third party and it is just some vlan without any hops. But thanks for the link to the nfs-test that looks interesting!

I've not really dug into testing tinc yet, but if you all will humor me in an uneducated blast of questions, I'd appreciate it. What can you do to keep tinc going if your high availability comes from cluster nodes being dispensable? Can tinc run on the cluster nodes? That seems like chicken/egg problem though to get tinc server installed and cluster nodes brought up... If tinc needs to be

You could try using an automounter, like autofs, in combination with sshfs. It'll be slower, possibly a lot slower, but it should be more reliable over an unreliable connection. I've been using: remote -fstype=fuse,allow_other,nodev,noatime,reconnect,ServerAliveInterval=15,ServerAliveCountMax=40,uid=0,gid=0,ro,nodev,noatime :sshfs\#root at remote.host.com\:/ BTW, I'm not sure