Hi to all,
i want to configure pfSense as a bridge and also traffic shaper,
the bridge mode it's done and ok,
but I was wondering if there is more information in addition to the pfsense
website
where to read more about this.
Thanks in advance
David Perez
__
>> On 23 apr. 2012, at 19:28, Ernst den Broeder wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
All. I am trying to work through a kernel crash I keep having with
pfSense 2.0.1 on Alix 2d13 hardware (my home router). This has been
going on for about 3-4 weeks now. The crash happens about every 2 days,
but it varies. Some ti
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 7:56 AM, k_o_l wrote:
>
> Don't you have a way to track which release is being used the most and
> tailor support accordingly
>
We don't have any means of knowing. Besides, that ultimately wouldn't
impact anything. I have little doubt there are tens of thousands of
systems
Hello everyone,
I have a pfsense with 4 vlans on 2 nics. The goal is that the user
gets served a different captive portal depending on which vlan he came
from.
I managed to do this making each vlan a different subnet and uploading
a captive portal which would redirect to the appropriate pages
depe
- "Adam Thompson" escribió:
> You can't really compare them directly. Sure, on paper there are a
> lot of common points, but the approach is so radically different, a
> comparison point-by-point would merely be misleading.
>
> If I had to draw analogies, I'd say pfSense is roughly as capab
On 4/24/2012 4:11 AM, Pim van Stam wrote:
On 23 apr. 2012, at 19:28, Ernst den Broeder wrote:
Hi All.
I am trying to work through a kernel crash I keep having with pfSense 2.0.1 on
Alix 2d13 hardware (my home router). This has been going on for about 3-4
weeks now. The crash happens about
From: list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org [mailto:list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org]
On Behalf Of Chris Buechler
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 4:41 AM
To: pfSense support and discussion
Subject: Re: [pfSense] pfSense "product support lifecycle"?
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:46 AM, Stefan Baur
wrote:
> Am 2
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Stefan Baur wrote:
> Am 24.04.2012 10:50, schrieb Gerald A:
>
> Uh, don't get me wrong, I'm all for timely updates that fix security
> issues. I just don't want to drag fancy stuff along that I don't need.
> And at present, that's what full IPv6 support is for
Op 24-4-2012 10:59, Chris Buechler schreef:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Stefan Baur
wrote:
Uh, don't get me wrong, I'm all for timely updates that fix security issues.
I just don't want to drag fancy stuff along that I don't need. And at
present, that's what full IPv6 support is for m
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:50 AM, Gerald A wrote:
>
> Lots of commercial firewall makers make updates to their "firmware" or loads
> which they expect you to load on as soon as you can. With those, you get a
> combo of security, bug fixes and "features" which may or may not be helpful,
> and has ne
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Stefan Baur
wrote:
>
> Uh, don't get me wrong, I'm all for timely updates that fix security issues.
> I just don't want to drag fancy stuff along that I don't need. And at
> present, that's what full IPv6 support is for me.
>
Which will be fully disabled when up
Am 24.04.2012 10:50, schrieb Gerald A:
Well, I'm sure you've heard of "never change a running system"...
and my 2.0.1 installations are running just fine right now, and
that's the way I like them. ;-)
I'm usually a pretty ardent follower of this rule myself -- except when
it comes
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:25 AM, Stefan Baur wrote:
> Am 24.04.2012 09:20, schrieb Seth Mos:
>
> There's a lot of other fixes unrelated to IPv6 in 2.1 that you'll find
>> which you will probably like.
>>
>
> Well, I'm sure you've heard of "never change a running system"... and my
> 2.0.1 in
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:46 AM, Stefan Baur
wrote:
> Am 24.04.2012 09:32, schrieb Chris Buechler:
>
>> Nothing formal. To date, once we put out a new release, all prior
>> releases will not get any updates. That will probably especially be
>> true going forward, with much shorter release cycles t
On 23 apr. 2012, at 19:28, Ernst den Broeder wrote:
> Hi All.
>
> I am trying to work through a kernel crash I keep having with pfSense 2.0.1
> on Alix 2d13 hardware (my home router). This has been going on for about 3-4
> weeks now. The crash happens about every 2 days, but it varies. Some
Am 24.04.2012 09:32, schrieb Chris Buechler:
Nothing formal. To date, once we put out a new release, all prior
releases will not get any updates. That will probably especially be
true going forward, with much shorter release cycles than we had from
1.2.3 to 2.0, and much fewer changes, hence much
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Stefan Baur
wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I just stumbled over a few posts mentioning the scheduled 2.1 release of
> pfSense on June 6, 2012.
> This has made me wonder: Is there any centralized resource (ordinary web
> page, wiki, whatever) where one can review what Micros
Am 24.04.2012 09:20, schrieb Seth Mos:
Well, we currently only really support the last one. The product mostly
evolves through repetition.
The last as in "the latest, current one", I suppose... :-(
There's a lot of other fixes unrelated to IPv6 in 2.1 that you'll find
which you will probabl
Op 24-4-2012 9:13, Stefan Baur schreef:
Hi list,
The thing is, I rolled out 2.0.1 (upgrading from 1.2.3) between November
2011 and February 2012, IIRC. I'd prefer to stay on 2.0.1 for a while,
as I don't need the IPv6 features of 2.1 just yet. I'm just wondering
how long after June 6, 2012 it
Hi list,
I just stumbled over a few posts mentioning the scheduled 2.1 release of
pfSense on June 6, 2012.
This has made me wonder: Is there any centralized resource (ordinary web
page, wiki, whatever) where one can review what Microsoft would call the
"product support lifecycle" of pfSense?
20 matches
Mail list logo
