When applying that patch do I need to rename the x.y.z files in the diff file
to match my current version, and then create the relevant files? My patch dry
run is failing because the files don’t currently exist.
Apologies, I’m a git/patch noob
Cheers,
Andi
From: Morris, Andi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 07 June 2016 10:33
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PacketFence-users] Still a problem with registration process
Thanks Louis,
I’ll take a look at that patch. Personally my system is only in development, so
future upgrades likely won’t affect me as I’m more likely to rebuild than
upgrade, and I’ll possibly wait until 6.1 before pushing to production.
For Andrew, I believe he has active users on his system, but has implemented
his own fix.
Cheers,
Andi
From: Louis Munro [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 06 June 2016 20:27
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PacketFence-users] Still a problem with registration process
On Jun 6, 2016, at 11:05 , Morris, Andi
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
When setting the reverse proxy to forward the original IP the packetfence
server doesn’t seem to respond to the incoming request.
Tcpdump output of the packetfence server shows:
16:01:51.644525 IP
host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com<http://host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com/>.51863
> pfguestdev.internal.uwic.ac.uk.https: Flags [S], seq 166613653, win 8192,
options [mss 1460,nop,wscale 2,nop,nop,sackOK], length 0
16:01:54.648694 IP
host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com<http://host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com/>.51863
> pfguestdev.internal.uwic.ac.uk.https: Flags [S], seq 166613653, win 8192,
options [mss 1460,nop,wscale 2,nop,nop,sackOK], length 0
16:02:00.654695 IP
host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com<http://host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com/>.51863
> pfguestdev.internal.uwic.ac.uk.https: Flags [S], seq 166613653, win 65535,
options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK], length 0
16:02:12.668769 IP
host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com<http://host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com/>.51863
> pfguestdev.internal.uwic.ac.uk.https: Flags [S], seq 3670114485, win 8192,
options [mss 1460,nop,wscale 2,nop,nop,sackOK], length 0
16:02:15.677516 IP
host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com<http://host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com/>.51863
> pfguestdev.internal.uwic.ac.uk.https: Flags [S], seq 3670114485, win 8192,
options [mss 1460,nop,wscale 2,nop,nop,sackOK], length 0
16:02:21.683543 IP
host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com<http://host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com/>.51863
> pfguestdev.internal.uwic.ac.uk.https: Flags [S], seq 3670114485, win 8192,
options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK], length 0
16:02:33.697445 IP
host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com<http://host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com/>.51863
> pfguestdev.internal.uwic.ac.uk.https: Flags [S], seq 317933843, win 8192,
options [mss 1460,nop,wscale 2,nop,nop,sackOK], length 0
16:02:36.706367 IP
host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com<http://host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com/>.51863
> pfguestdev.internal.uwic.ac.uk.https: Flags [S], seq 317933843, win 8192,
options [mss 1460,nop,wscale 2,nop,nop,sackOK], length 0
16:02:42.712373 IP
host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com<http://host86-176-129-66.range86-176.btcentralplus.com/>.51863
> pfguestdev.internal.uwic.ac.uk.https: Flags [S], seq 317933843, win 8192,
options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK], length 0
So the https request is reaching the server, however there is nothing at all in
the packetfence.log
Hi Andy,
This looks like a possible case of iptables dropping the packets wouldn’t you
say?
There’s an upcoming fix for this issue (#1522 on github) in the current devel
branch (which will in time become 6.1):
If your are running 6.0.x it might be worth looking into.
This code will end up being part of your PF whenever you upgrade.
Be carefull to take a look at “db/upgrade-X.X.X-X.Y.Z.sql”.
We had to alter the “activation” table.
If you do apply this, you’ll have to remember to comment that one change in the
database upgrade script on the day you move to 6.1 for real.
Mysql will not let you apply the same change twice.
Regards,
--
Louis Munro
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ::
www.inverse.ca<http://www.inverse.ca>
+1.514.447.4918 x125 :: +1 (866) 353-6153 x125
Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (www.sogo.nu<http://www.sogo.nu>) and
PacketFence (www.packetfence.org<http://www.packetfence.org>)
________________________________
[Image removed by sender. Cardiff Metropolitan University - Queens Anniversary
Prizes
2015]<http://www.cardiffmet.ac.uk/news/Pages/Cardiff-Met-research-recognised-in-Queens-Anniversary-Prizes-for-Higher-and-Further-Education.aspx>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic
patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are
consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow,
J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity
planning reports. https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/305295220;132659582;e
_______________________________________________
PacketFence-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users
