On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Ronny Lindner <
net-spi...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Am Mon, 7 Feb 2011 08:11:55 +0100 schrieb nap:
>
> > So I don't think port forwarding will be useful.
>
> and you are right, it isn't useful ;)
>
> > Is LOC2 a sub realm of LOC1? Can you look in the log of t
Am Mon, 7 Feb 2011 08:11:55 +0100 schrieb nap:
> So I don't think port forwarding will be useful.
and you are right, it isn't useful ;)
> Is LOC2 a sub realm of LOC1? Can you look in the log of the broker.
> It will see where it try to connect (all schedulers?). What do you
> expect in "problems
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Ronny Lindner <
net-spi...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> > > The first test with 4 hosts and one realm worked just fine. Then I
> > > tried to use two realms, but I didn't get data from the new realm.
> > >
> > > Here is my setup:
> > >
> > > - Loc1 (behind NAT -
> > The first test with 4 hosts and one realm worked just fine. Then I
> > tried to use two realms, but I didn't get data from the new realm.
> >
> > Here is my setup:
> >
> > - Loc1 (behind NAT - my home internet line) monitors localhost
> > (arbiter) and a webserver with public IP
> > - Loc2 (pol
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 9:52 PM, Ronny Lindner <
net-spi...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Hi,
> I was a silent observer for some months - now I had time to test
> shinken.
>
Great :)
>
> The first test with 4 hosts and one realm worked just fine. Then I
> tried to use two realms, b
