Tag Info

New answers tagged

0

I agree with @thelogix that this is probably a Very Bad Idea because it would block legitimate users and - depending on its implementation - possibly slow down your service. But if you still want to to it, here are two ways of doing it. First thing, you want to set up a local DNS cache to speed things up. Set high TTLs for negative caching (in case of ...


1

If you're talking about "unresolved IP's" as seen in AwStats, then no. There is no way to do this from a firewall. "Unresolved" refers to the fact that the IP address has no reverse-dns set up. This is becoming the norm for "non servers"! This means IF you could block based on this, you'd block a lot of DSL lines and other home-user connections. ...


0

Perhaps this is what you need. Cisco's own documentation has a step by step guide on how to add a DMZ with a public ip pointed to a single host internally.


1

You need a NAT and port forwarding... PUBLIC IP | ----------------- | NAT | ----------------- | | TCP 80 | UDP 53 | | | Ubuntu Everything else Server Private IP Private IP You have both the nameserver and the webserver on the Ubuntu box. So your NAT router ...


1

The Private IP is not accessible from outside the AWS network and is only useful when you have a cluster of EC2 instances for communication between them with-in your security group. You could assign a Elastic IP to the instance or use a Dynamic DNS Solution.


1

You have to use a Dynamic DNS solution for this. You could use a DNS provider or configure your own Dynamic DNS server (there are a lot of tutorials for this). There are also scripts for using Route53 for this.


1

Also make sure Route table of VPC is set to enable IP address outside the VPC (0.0.0.0/0) to flow from the subnet to the Internet gateway. Navigate to VPC > Route Tables ; Route tab. Check Destination is 'mapped' to Target Internet Gateway Id (apart from local).


1

First of all, you cannot bring the IP address along as you move to another hosting provider. IP addresses can only be moved between hosting providers, if you have a block of addresses, which was large enough to be announced over BGP. Any approach you take to moving would require a transition period where you are using one IP at the current hosting provider ...


1

Your assumption that pointing a "nameserver" for a domain to an IP address is correct. Porting the IP over while "possible" does not sound like you meet the requirements to achieve this. You need to do this in stages. The first of which is getting the nameserver for each domain pointed to a DNS record which resolves to the same IP address they use today. ...


0

Yes, it is. Just use 0.0.0.0 for a binding address in your MySQL configuration file (e.g. /etc/mysql/my.cnf) as follows: bind-address = 0.0.0.0 If the address is 0.0.0.0, the server accepts TCP/IP connections on all server host IPv4 interfaces. Furthermore if the address is ::, the server accepts TCP/IP connections on all server host IPv4 and IPv6 ...


1

No it will not, you can have as many as you want


0

Did not try it, but I think it should work <LocationMatch /administrator> <IfModule mod_security2.c> SecRule REMOTE_HOST "@ipmatch 1.2.3.4" \ "id:12345,phase:2,t:none,pass,nolog,noauditlog,ctl:ruleRemovebyID=000000" </IfModule> </LocationMatch>


15

Ugh. I don't normally chime in after so many good people have answered, but I can't entirely agree with any of the answers so far posted. After 20 years of DNS admin, here's my take: Should DNS just be outsourced? No. It's perfectly fine to run your own DNS server (though a static IP address is to my mind essential), and as Vasili notes, it's a good ...


3

Yes, DNS and web server can be on the same IP. However the way DNS is usually configured, it has to be a static IP. Running a web server on a dynamic IP is simple, as long as the DNS server supports it. Moreover, you really should have two DNS servers with IPs in different subnets. So it may be simpler to just host you domain at one of the many free DNS ...


-1

DNS is pretty central to all serving. Consider moving your DNS to a dedicated provider: Dyn UltraDNS Route53 Doing so will fix the one problem you've identified, namely that your domain registrar wants you to provide at least two (some regions three or more) DNS servers for your domain. Sometimes, your domain registrar will provide this service for ...


1

This is no problem technically speaking. But that's not what you want for your "home server" needs. Register yourself to some DynDNS service (DynDNS, no-ip, etc...) and point your domain there, thats it. Don't run a DNS Server if you don't know what you are doing. In your case it is also not needed to run one yourself.


12

There's nothing wrong with having two services go to the same IP address, as long as the destination ports do not conflict with one another. In this case, you would be using port 53 for DNS, and port 80 for your web server. You can also have both (or all) of your nameservers set to the same IP address.* You will need to set up an authoritative DNS ...


1

Your iptables rules are broken in multiple ways. First of all, your POSTROUTING chain has two rules, but the first one matches every packet, so the second rule is never used. Secondly, your SNAT and MASQUERADE rules should only be applied to packets leaving on eth0. But since 212.235.19.203 is allocated to just one machine, you may be better off not using ...


0

I suppose you tried the iptables at (server_1) instead of (server_2) as you said. The problem here is that (server_2) doesn't know that it has to answer packets whose destination is 212.235.19.203. One posible solution is to use the following in (server_2): iptables -t nat -I PREROUTING -d 212.235.19.203 -j REDIRECT


0

Poor man's solution: use port knocking. Probably it isn't the best choice, and it may rise alerts on IDS (if not trained to discard this false positive, but login attempts from recently changed IPs will raise them too). Anyways it may suffice, since you would be setting it as a last resort, after a (hopefully) remote event of changing all 3 IPs withouht ...


1

This is not generally done by pinging or ARP trickery. It's done by paperwork. Every request for IPv4 address assignments requires detailed justification, showing that existing addresses are fully utilized and that (in the case of ARIN) the new assignment will be 80% utilized within 30 days. See the ARIN Number Resource Policy Manual for complete details. ...


0

There is no way to tell for certain that each IP maps to a different server. If you are on the same LAN you can use most IP scanning tools (or ping them and look at your ARP table) to match the IP addresses to network cards. But that still doesn't mean unique servers (virtual or physical), since you could add 20 network cards to one VPS. Even worse, they ...


0

You cannot do this. MAC addresses are only useful on Layer 2 networks. And besides, interfaces with multiple IP addresses do not need to have their own MAC.


3

You will need to configure IP-Based Virtual Host. You can do that by editing your apache/httpd.conf file, add something like this: <VirtualHost 100.100.100.100:80> ServerAdmin rubberduck@mydomain.com DocumentRoot /home/admin/domains/mydomain.com/public_html ServerName site.mydomain.com ErrorLog /var/log/httpd/logs/site/error_log TransferLog ...


1

You forget to mention what SMTP server you are using. If using Postfix you'll have some build-in features like http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_client_message_rate_limit to reduce the number of messages a client can send along with http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#anvil_rate_time_unit to specify a period of time to monitor. As far as i ...


0

Finally I got myself the problem. Basically while adding a route we also need to define the scope and proto as well. In my case the reason I was not able to add it back because I was not specifying the scope. Scope defined visibility of the IP in the network. It could be host, link [limited to LAN], gloabal etc. So the correct syntax to add it would be ...


2

The reason for this is that you actually have two routing table entries. First there is the default, which points at the gateway 192.168.2.1 in 192.168.2.0/24 network, and then there is the network route for network for interface eth0 (ie. 192.168.2.0/24) as well. If you delete the network route of an active, it effectively shuts it down. In this particular ...


0

There are two possible interpretations to your question here: You've updated a DNS record, but you're still seeing the old address, which means your connections are going to the wrong place. Your webserver is still listening on the old IP and not the new one. If the former then you need to flush your cache, or wait for the record to expire. If the ...


0

You will need to add a route on machine C: route add -host 128.247.19.194 gateway 128.247.19.165 You may also need a route on machine A, something like this: route add -host 128.247.19.3 gateway 128.247.19.164 But first, try only with the route on machine C, if it does not work, add also the route for the A machine.


1

This functionality does not exist within the RDP protocol or the MS RDP/Terminal Services server. The only real option to achieve this is with a firewall - an edge firewall, for example, but even the built in Windows firewall has this functionality.



Top 50 recent answers are included