Re: [pfSense Support] LAN sis0 interface mismatch
Sounds like you need to assign which interfaces you want to be WAN and LAN etc.. Is this the first time you are running PFSense? on 23/06/06 18:02 Tunge2 said the following: what does the error: "LAN sis0 interface mismatch -- Running interface assignement option" mean? I get this error when i reboot our pfsense router? -- Jack Pivac Delphinus Technology http://www.delphinus.co.nz/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [pfSense Support] LAN sis0 interface mismatch
It means there is an Interface assigned to LAN in your config.xml which is not present in your machine anymore. For example the config.xml has rl3 for LAN but there is no rl3 interface detected at bootup. It asks for interface reassignment to make your configfile have valid information again. This way you also can move your config to a different system with different hardware. The rest of the configfile will stay the way it is. Holger -Original Message- From: Tunge2 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 8:03 AM To: support@pfsense.com Subject: [pfSense Support] LAN sis0 interface mismatch what does the error: "LAN sis0 interface mismatch -- Running interface assignement option" mean? I get this error when i reboot our pfsense router? Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirusKit - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] LAN sis0 interface mismatch
no. I've updated the pfsense machine yesterday with cvs-update? i have to reconfigure/re-assin the interfaces every time i reboot our PFsense machine. Version 1.0-RC1a built on Fri Jun 16 01:04:23 UTC 2006 2006/6/23, Jack Pivac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Sounds like you need to assign which interfaces you want to be WAN andLAN etc..Is this the first time you are running PFSense? on 23/06/06 18:02 Tunge2 said the following:> what does the error: "LAN sis0 interface mismatch -- Running interface> assignement option" mean?>> I get this error when i reboot our pfsense router? --Jack PivacDelphinus Technologyhttp://www.delphinus.co.nz/-To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fwd: FW: [pfSense Support] ADD more routes to IPsec Tunnel
is this command/function "echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward" default enabled in pfsense (RC1)? or do i have to enable it manually (how can i do this because /proc doesn't existed?) Van: Tunge2 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Verzonden: woensdag 21 juni 2006 17:48 Aan: support@pfsense.comOnderwerp: Re: [pfSense Support] ADD more routes to IPsec Tunnel :( snif thank for the answer 2006/6/21, Scott Ullrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: On 6/21/06, Tunge2 < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> just like ipsec?? but with openvpn you have a real interface(tun0) so you > can route with it??Sure there is but the webConfigurator doesn't support it.- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO
HI, I have made a VPN from Cisco VPN Concentrator to PfSense and all works fine, but when connection on Cisco side go down for any reason the tunnel don't succeed to establish a new one. From cisco side all seems ok but pfsense log same errors: racoon: INFO: request for establishing IPsec-SA was queued due to no phase1 found racoon: ERROR: phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 88bf18f7d1e83702: So I have to reboot PfSense to establish a new VPN. Do you think there is a way to resolve this problem? Thanx in advance. ~Alvaro A.PIetrobonoList Spa - ITALYphone: +39050800151email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]web: www.list.it
Re: Fwd: FW: [pfSense Support] ADD more routes to IPsec Tunnel
Tunge2 schrieb: is this command/function "*echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward" *default enabled in pfsense (RC1)? or do i have to enable it manually (how can i do this because /proc doesn't existed?) FreeBSD ain't Linux. pfSense = FreeBSD. I think FreeBSD6 has abandoned procfs. It's considered evil, IIRC. ;-) cheers, Rainer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] LAN sis0 interface mismatch
I get another error at the console : "Route: writing to routing socket: no such process". this is wen i select option "1) Assign Interfaces" and then 'a' for auto.detection to re-assign the interface. when i do it manually the error disappears, and the wan interface is working great until the next reboot... 2006/6/23, Tunge2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: no. I've updated the pfsense machine yesterday with cvs-update? i have to reconfigure/re-assin the interfaces every time i reboot our PFsense machine. Version 1.0-RC1a built on Fri Jun 16 01:04:23 UTC 2006 2006/6/23, Jack Pivac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Sounds like you need to assign which interfaces you want to be WAN andLAN etc..Is this the first time you are running PFSense? on 23/06/06 18:02 Tunge2 said the following:> what does the error: "LAN sis0 interface mismatch -- Running interface> assignement option" mean?>> I get this error when i reboot our pfsense router? --Jack PivacDelphinus Technologyhttp://www.delphinus.co.nz/- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] Squid and HAVP
Dear Sirs, I'm having many problems with Squid and HAVP packages. I don't know if this the right place to ask for support but I'll try. The first one (squid) stop on every configuration change and I have to reboot the pfsense machine to bring it back up. Furthermore I'am quite sure that it doesn't uses the upstream proxy even if I setup one in the gui. The second one (HAVP) when browsing SSL protected pages gives back a web page saying: 'invalid request'. I know that the SSL web traffic is cyphered but how can I solve the problem? Thank you. Santilli Quirino - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: FW: [pfSense Support] ADD more routes to IPsec Tunnel
Does PFsens say for example, route between a tun0 and a tun1 interface? or do i need the ip_forward trick or do i need something else? why did you say ed "FreeBSD6 has abandoned procfs.It's considered evil, IIRC". 2006/6/23, Rainer Duffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Tunge2 schrieb:> is this command/function "*echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward" > *default enabled in pfsense (RC1)? or do i have to enable it manually> (how can i do this because /proc doesn't existed?)>>>FreeBSD ain't Linux.pfSense = FreeBSD.I think FreeBSD6 has abandoned procfs. It's considered evil, IIRC.;-)cheers,Rainer-To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: FW: [pfSense Support] ADD more routes to IPsec Tunnel
You can verify this: sysctl net.inet.ip.forwarding if is 1 forwarding between every interface is enable, if 0 not. ~Alvaro - Original Message - From: Tunge2 To: support@pfsense.com Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 12:57 PM Subject: Re: Fwd: FW: [pfSense Support] ADD more routes to IPsec Tunnel Does PFsens say for example, route between a tun0 and a tun1 interface? or do i need the ip_forward trick or do i need something else? why did you say ed "FreeBSD6 has abandoned procfs.It's considered evil, IIRC". 2006/6/23, Rainer Duffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Tunge2 schrieb:> is this command/function "*echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward"> *default enabled in pfsense (RC1)? or do i have to enable it manually> (how can i do this because /proc doesn't existed?)>>>FreeBSD ain't Linux.pfSense = FreeBSD.I think FreeBSD6 has abandoned procfs. It's considered evil, IIRC.;-)cheers,Rainer-To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO
Try "prefer older IPSEC SA" at system>advanced. Disable and enable IPSEC at the pfSense end to make sure the new settings are applied. Does disabling and enabling IPSEC at the pfSense solve the issue if the cisco can't connect? From the logs it looks like the cisco doesn't answer to the connection attempt of the pfSense. Also is one side of the setup at a dynamic IP and if so which one? Holger -Original Message- From: Alvaro Pietrobono [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 11:33 AM To: support@pfsense.com Subject: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO HI, I have made a VPN from Cisco VPN Concentrator to PfSense and all works fine, but when connection on Cisco side go down for any reason the tunnel don't succeed to establish a new one. From cisco side all seems ok but pfsense log same errors: racoon: INFO: request for establishing IPsec-SA was queued due to no phase1 found racoon: ERROR: phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 88bf18f7d1e83702: So I have to reboot PfSense to establish a new VPN. Do you think there is a way to resolve this problem? Thanx in advance. ~Alvaro A.PIetrobono List Spa - ITALY phone: +39050800151 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: www.list.it Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirusKit - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: FW: [pfSense Support] ADD more routes to IPsec Tunnel
# sysctl net.inet.ip.forwardingnet.inet.ip.forwarding: 1 so that 1 2006/6/23, Alvaro Pietrobono <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: You can verify this: sysctl net.inet.ip.forwarding if is 1 forwarding between every interface is enable, if 0 not. ~Alvaro - Original Message - From: Tunge2 To: support@pfsense.com Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 12:57 PM Subject: Re: Fwd: FW: [pfSense Support] ADD more routes to IPsec Tunnel Does PFsens say for example, route between a tun0 and a tun1 interface? or do i need the ip_forward trick or do i need something else? why did you say ed "FreeBSD6 has abandoned procfs.It's considered evil, IIRC". 2006/6/23, Rainer Duffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Tunge2 schrieb:> is this command/function "*echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward" > *default enabled in pfsense (RC1)? or do i have to enable it manually> (how can i do this because /proc doesn't existed?)>>>FreeBSD ain't Linux.pfSense = FreeBSD.I think FreeBSD6 has abandoned procfs. It's considered evil, IIRC.;-)cheers,Rainer-To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] Squid and HAVP
Quirino Santilli wrote: The second one (HAVP) when browsing SSL protected pages gives back a web page saying: 'invalid request'. I know that the SSL web traffic is cyphered but how can I solve the problem? As far as I know HAVP does not support SSL traffic. So may be you should try not to use HAVP as ssl proxy (ie just use HAVP to proxy HTTP traffic). raj - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] ADD more routes to IPsec Tunnel
If you config Vpn tunnell site-to-site with openvpn you can route everithing adding static routes for lan interface and in field "gateway" putting the IP of the other peer. I tring some configuration and the behavor is that expected (I using openvpn as vpn backup). The problem however is the firewall. If you haven't the right rules, interesting traffic don't pass the routerI modified 2 files adding tun interface by hand: firewall_rules.php firewall_rules_edit.php and adding rules via web confogurator but I have some problems reloading rules (rules with variable $tun aren't recognize) ~Alvaro - Original Message - From: Tunge2 To: support@pfsense.com Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 5:48 PM Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] ADD more routes to IPsec Tunnel :( snif thank for the answer 2006/6/21, Scott Ullrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: On 6/21/06, Tunge2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> just like ipsec?? but with openvpn you have a real interface(tun0) so you > can route with it??Sure there is but the webConfigurator doesn't support it.-To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO
Try "prefer older IPSEC SA" at system>advanced already done...is the same Does disabling and enabling IPSEC at the pfSense solve the issue if the cisco can't connect? Yes, it solve. disabling tunnel on Cisco and disabling and enabling IPSEC at the pfSense connection goes up again without problem. Also is one side of the setup at a dynamic IP and if so which one? No. both have static IP. I think this is a manual way and not automatic At the bottom of IPsec configuration there is a field "keep alive"does it work? ~Alvaro - Original Message - From: "Holger Bauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 12:58 PM Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO Try "prefer older IPSEC SA" at system>advanced. Disable and enable IPSEC at the pfSense end to make sure the new settings are applied. Does disabling and enabling IPSEC at the pfSense solve the issue if the cisco can't connect? From the logs it looks like the cisco doesn't answer to the connection attempt of the pfSense. Also is one side of the setup at a dynamic IP and if so which one? Holger -Original Message- From: Alvaro Pietrobono [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 11:33 AM To: support@pfsense.com Subject: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO HI, I have made a VPN from Cisco VPN Concentrator to PfSense and all works fine, but when connection on Cisco side go down for any reason the tunnel don't succeed to establish a new one. From cisco side all seems ok but pfsense log same errors: racoon: INFO: request for establishing IPsec-SA was queued due to no phase1 found racoon: ERROR: phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 88bf18f7d1e83702: So I have to reboot PfSense to establish a new VPN. Do you think there is a way to resolve this problem? Thanx in advance. ~Alvaro A.PIetrobono List Spa - ITALY phone: +39050800151 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: www.list.it Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirusKit - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ((( Internet Email Confidentiality Footer ))) This e-mail, including any attachments, may contain information that is protected by law as privileged and confidential, and is transmitted for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, copying or retention of this e-mail or the information contained herein is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify immediately the sender by telephone or reply by e-mail, and permanently delete this e-mail from your computer system. The statements and opinions expressed in this e-mail message are those of the author of the message and do not necessarily represent those of List Group S.p.A. Besides, the contents of this message shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by List Group S.p.A. List Group S.p.A. does not accept liability for corruption, interception or amendment, if any, or the consequences thereof. --- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO
Yes, I use it to make remote pfSenses at dynamic endpoints join automatically again after their IP has changed and to keep tunnels up even without traffic from clients keeping it alive. Holger > -Original Message- > From: Alvaro Pietrobono [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 3:50 PM > To: support@pfsense.com > Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO > > > > Try "prefer older IPSEC SA" at system>advanced > > already done...is the same > > > Does disabling and enabling IPSEC at the pfSense solve the > issue if the > > cisco can't connect? > > Yes, it solve. disabling tunnel on Cisco and disabling and > enabling IPSEC at > the pfSense > connection goes up again without problem. > > > > Also is one side of the setup at a dynamic IP and if so which one? > > No. both have static IP. > > I think this is a manual way and not automatic > At the bottom of IPsec configuration there is > a field "keep alive"does it work? > > ~Alvaro > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Holger Bauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 12:58 PM > Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO > > > Try "prefer older IPSEC SA" at system>advanced. Disable and > enable IPSEC at > the pfSense end to make sure the new settings are applied. > Does disabling > and enabling IPSEC at the pfSense solve the issue if the cisco can't > connect? From the logs it looks like the cisco doesn't answer to the > connection attempt of the pfSense. Also is one side of the setup at a > dynamic IP and if so which one? > > Holger > -Original Message- > From: Alvaro Pietrobono [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 11:33 AM > To: support@pfsense.com > Subject: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO > > > HI, > I have made a VPN from Cisco VPN Concentrator > to PfSense and all works fine, but when connection on Cisco side > go down for any reason the tunnel don't succeed to establish > a new one. From cisco side all seems ok but pfsense log > same errors: > racoon: INFO: request for establishing IPsec-SA was queued > due to no phase1 > found > racoon: ERROR: phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. > 88bf18f7d1e83702: > > So I have to reboot PfSense to establish a new VPN. > > Do you think there is a way to resolve this problem? > > Thanx in advance. > > ~Alvaro > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A.PIetrobono > List Spa - ITALY > phone: +39050800151 > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > web: www.list.it > > > > Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirusKit > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > ((( Internet Email Confidentiality Footer ))) > > This e-mail, including any attachments, may contain > information that is > protected by law as privileged and confidential, and is > transmitted for > the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended > recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, > dissemination, copying > or retention of this e-mail or the information contained herein is > strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in > error, please > notify immediately the sender by telephone or reply by e-mail, and > permanently delete this e-mail from your computer system. > The statements and opinions expressed in this e-mail message are > those of the author of the message and do not necessarily represent > those of List Group S.p.A. Besides, the contents of this message > shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by List Group S.p.A. > List Group S.p.A. does not accept liability for corruption, > interception or > amendment, if any, or the consequences thereof. > > -- > - > > Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirusKit - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] LAN sis0 interface mismatch
On 6/23/06, Tunge2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I get another error at the console : "Route: writing to routing socket: no such process". this is wen i select option "1) Assign Interfaces" and then 'a' for auto.detection to re-assign the interface. when i do it manually the error disappears, and the wan interface is working great until the next reboot... What kind of install is this? Embedded? Compact flash? LiveCD w/ floppy? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] ADD more routes to IPsec Tunnel
do you have an example of how to configure site to site vpn with openvpn and pfsense? i could not find a way to connect 2 openvpn server? i did find a way to connect a openvpnserver to a openvpn client and that works great !!! 2006/6/23, Alvaro Pietrobono <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: If you config Vpn tunnell site-to-site with openvpn you can route everithing adding static routes for lan interface and in field "gateway" putting the IP of the other peer. I tring some configuration and the behavor is that expected (I using openvpn as vpn backup). The problem however is the firewall. If you haven't the right rules, interesting traffic don't pass the routerI modified 2 files adding tun interface by hand: firewall_rules.php firewall_rules_edit.php and adding rules via web confogurator but I have some problems reloading rules (rules with variable $tun aren't recognize) ~Alvaro - Original Message - From: Tunge2 To: support@pfsense.com Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 5:48 PM Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] ADD more routes to IPsec Tunnel :( snif thank for the answer 2006/6/21, Scott Ullrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: On 6/21/06, Tunge2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> just like ipsec?? but with openvpn you have a real interface(tun0) so you > can route with it??Sure there is but the webConfigurator doesn't support it.- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] LAN sis0 interface mismatch
sorry sorry it's a live cd-rom installed on a hard disk 2006/6/23, Scott Ullrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: On 6/23/06, Tunge2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> I get another error at the console : "Route: writing to routing socket: no such process". this is wen i select option "1) Assign Interfaces" and then 'a' for auto.detection to re-assign the interface. when i do it manually the error disappears, and the wan interface is working great until the next reboot...What kind of install is this? Embedded? Compact flash? LiveCD w/ floppy? -To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] LAN sis0 interface mismatch
On 6/23/06, Tunge2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: sorry sorry it's a live cd-rom installed on a hard disk This doesn't make much sense. After the machine is up and running take a look at /cf/conf/config.xml and make sure that your interfaces have changed from sis0, etc. Sounds like you need to reinstall at first glance. Scott - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] Transcend IDE Flash drives
My Cheap CF Card I was using to kida test PFSense just Died. No fault to anything except that I used cheap hardware. I am looking at spending a little bit more money to get a transcend card to install it on. I just wanted to see if anyone out there is using the Transcend Flash drives and if so, what are you using and how does it work. I hate to spend money only to find it is not compatible. Thanks, Ryan (Sorry if this goes out more than once. My server is on drugs or something) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] What happens if the soekris hardware is defective upon arrival? The Cortex Systems way.
Hi group, just writting this short note to let you know how Cortex Systems - "your soekris provider" operate. I did a bank transfer for a soekris net4801-60 (256MB RAM) and other elements. When it arrived the hardware only recognizes 128MB of RAM. I got in touch with the support team and a tecnical & sales consultant (i will avoid personal references) told the that i should pay the expenses of send back the box to Denmark. I told him/her that when i paid i used money in good standing and i wait to have exactly the same behavior with the product i'm buying. The answer was "That's the way it works when you buy via the internet, this is standard practice." I told him/her that was funny that the standard practice were make a client pay twice for a product/service. So friends, think twice if you're going to buy in Cortex Systems your soekris hardware for Firewall/Router/Misc. because if you have a problem you will have to pay for a sevice bad offered. Best regards to all, Jonathan GF signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [pfSense Support] What happens if the soekris hardware is defective upon arrival? The Cortex Systems way.
On 6/23/06, Jonathan Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi group, just writting this short note to let you know how Cortex Systems - "your soekris provider" operate. I did a bank transfer for a soekris net4801-60 (256MB RAM) and other elements. When it arrived the hardware only recognizes 128MB of RAM. I got in touch with the support team and a tecnical & sales consultant (i will avoid personal references) told the that i should pay the expenses of send back the box to Denmark. I told him/her that when i paid i used money in good standing and i wait to have exactly the same behavior with the product i'm buying. The answer was "That's the way it works when you buy via the internet, this is standard practice." I told him/her that was funny that the standard practice were make a client pay twice for a product/service. So friends, think twice if you're going to buy in Cortex Systems your soekris hardware for Firewall/Router/Misc. because if you have a problem you will have to pay for a sevice bad offered. Wow. Sorry to hear that... Scott - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [pfSense Support] What happens if the soekris hardware is defective upon arrival? The Cortex Systems way.
It is pretty standard practice...but it's bad standard practice. IMO, it would be different if the (proper) hardware had been working for six months and needed replacement due to failure, but in this case, he never got what he ordered. That falls on the manufacturer/VAR to get rectified. Until he takes delivery of the proper hardware, its just an unfulfilled contract. -Original Message- From: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 11:39 AM To: support@pfsense.com Cc: discussion@pfsense.com Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] What happens if the soekris hardware is defective upon arrival? The Cortex Systems way. On 6/23/06, Jonathan Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi group, > > just writting this short note to let you know how Cortex Systems - > "your soekris provider" operate. > > I did a bank transfer for a soekris net4801-60 (256MB RAM) and other > elements. When it arrived the hardware only recognizes 128MB of RAM. > > I got in touch with the support team and a tecnical & sales consultant > (i will avoid personal references) told the that i should pay the > expenses of send back the box to Denmark. > > I told him/her that when i paid i used money in good standing and i > wait to have exactly the same behavior with the product i'm buying. > > The answer was "That's the way it works when you buy via the internet, > this is standard practice." > > I told him/her that was funny that the standard practice were make a > client pay twice for a product/service. > > So friends, think twice if you're going to buy in Cortex Systems your > soekris hardware for Firewall/Router/Misc. because if you have a > problem you will have to pay for a sevice bad offered. Wow. Sorry to hear that... Scott - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] What happens if the soekris hardware is defective upon arrival? The Cortex Systems way.
Might I be the first to recommend https://kd85.com/soekris.html for all of your Soekris needs, am just a satisfied customer but thought it work mentioning. When I recieved my Soekris there was a scratch on the case. Sent a photo of this to them, got an answer straight back, they sent out a new case free of charge and didn't even want the other one back (since obviously it would cos more than it's worth to ship). All in all a wonderful experience, and clearly someone who is worth dealing with again. Dan On 23/06/06, Scott Ullrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 6/23/06, Jonathan Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi group, > > just writting this short note to let you know how Cortex Systems - "your > soekris provider" operate. > > I did a bank transfer for a soekris net4801-60 (256MB RAM) and other > elements. When it arrived the hardware only recognizes 128MB of RAM. > > I got in touch with the support team and a tecnical & sales consultant > (i will avoid personal references) told the that i should pay the > expenses of send back the box to Denmark. > > I told him/her that when i paid i used money in good standing and i wait > to have exactly the same behavior with the product i'm buying. > > The answer was "That's the way it works when you buy via the internet, > this is standard practice." > > I told him/her that was funny that the standard practice were make a > client pay twice for a product/service. > > So friends, think twice if you're going to buy in Cortex Systems your > soekris hardware for Firewall/Router/Misc. because if you have a problem > you will have to pay for a sevice bad offered. Wow. Sorry to hear that... Scott - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] Startup sound on FX5620 in slow-mo
When I boot up a FX5620 with 1.0-RC1a embedded on a compact flash card, the startup chimes are played in slow motion and take about 10 seconds to play. When I installed it on a regular PC a while back the startup sound was much quicker. Can anyone else with an FX5620 confirm that they see this? It in no way impact the usability of the system, this is just an oddity that I thought I would make note of. Josh - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] Startup sound on FX5620 in slow-mo
On 6/23/06, Josh Stompro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: When I boot up a FX5620 with 1.0-RC1a embedded on a compact flash card, the startup chimes are played in slow motion and take about 10 seconds to play. When I installed it on a regular PC a while back the startup sound was much quicker. Can anyone else with an FX5620 confirm that they see this? It in no way impact the usability of the system, this is just an oddity that I thought I would make note of. Sounds like the hardware clock is not correct. You may want to change the clock to TSC and see if that helps. There was a forum message regarding this: http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=1253.0 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] Startup sound on FX5620 in slow-mo
Josh Stompro wrote: When I boot up a FX5620 with 1.0-RC1a embedded on a compact flash card If the clock isn't an issue, from what I've experienced, having the sounds play substantially longer with CF is normal. all my embedded hardware drags the sound out much, much longer than my hard drive installs. I believe there was a post here not too long ago that said that's normal because of something to do with how it reads the thing off the card/drive, it will play longer with slow I/O devices. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] Startup sound on FX5620 in slow-mo
On 6/23/06, Chris Buechler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If the clock isn't an issue, from what I've experienced, having the sounds play substantially longer with CF is normal. all my embedded hardware drags the sound out much, much longer than my hard drive installs. I believe there was a post here not too long ago that said that's normal because of something to do with how it reads the thing off the card/drive, it will play longer with slow I/O devices. For what its worth VMWARE does the same thing with a hard drive install unless you change the timing clock. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO
Please forgive the ignorant question, but one would put a private address from the other side of the VPN in the keep alive field, correct? ~Brian > -Original Message- > From: Holger Bauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 7:01 AM > To: support@pfsense.com > Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO > > > Yes, I use it to make remote pfSenses at dynamic endpoints > join automatically again after their IP has changed and to > keep tunnels up even without traffic from clients keeping it alive. > > Holger > > > -Original Message- > > From: Alvaro Pietrobono [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 3:50 PM > > To: support@pfsense.com > > Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel > with CISCO > > > > > > > Try "prefer older IPSEC SA" at system>advanced > > > > already done...is the same > > > > > Does disabling and enabling IPSEC at the pfSense solve the > > issue if the > > > cisco can't connect? > > > > Yes, it solve. disabling tunnel on Cisco and disabling and > > enabling IPSEC at > > the pfSense > > connection goes up again without problem. > > > > > > > Also is one side of the setup at a dynamic IP and if so which one? > > > > No. both have static IP. > > > > I think this is a manual way and not automatic > > At the bottom of IPsec configuration there is > > a field "keep alive"does it work? > > > > ~Alvaro > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Holger Bauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: > > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 12:58 PM > > Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel > with CISCO > > > > > > Try "prefer older IPSEC SA" at system>advanced. Disable and > > enable IPSEC at > > the pfSense end to make sure the new settings are applied. > > Does disabling > > and enabling IPSEC at the pfSense solve the issue if the > cisco can't > > connect? From the logs it looks like the cisco doesn't > answer to the > > connection attempt of the pfSense. Also is one side of the > setup at a > > dynamic IP and if so which one? > > > > Holger > > -Original Message- > > From: Alvaro Pietrobono [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 11:33 AM > > To: support@pfsense.com > > Subject: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO > > > > > > HI, > > I have made a VPN from Cisco VPN Concentrator > > to PfSense and all works fine, but when connection on Cisco > side go > > down for any reason the tunnel don't succeed to establish a > new one. > > From cisco side all seems ok but pfsense log same errors: > > racoon: INFO: request for establishing IPsec-SA was queued > > due to no phase1 > > found > > racoon: ERROR: phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. > > 88bf18f7d1e83702: > > > > So I have to reboot PfSense to establish a new VPN. > > > > Do you think there is a way to resolve this problem? > > > > Thanx in advance. > > > > ~Alvaro > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A.PIetrobono > > List Spa - ITALY > > phone: +39050800151 > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > web: www.list.it > > > > > > > > Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirusKit > > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > ((( Internet Email Confidentiality Footer > ))) > > > > This e-mail, including any attachments, may contain > > information that is > > protected by law as privileged and confidential, and is > > transmitted for > > the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended > > recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, > > dissemination, copying > > or retention of this e-mail or the information contained herein is > > strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in > > error, please > > notify immediately the sender by telephone or reply by e-mail, and > > permanently delete this e-mail from your computer system. > > The statements and opinions expressed in this e-mail message are > > those of the author of the message and do not necessarily represent > > those of List Group S.p.A. Besides, the contents of this message > > shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by List > Group S.p.A. > > List Group S.p.A. does not accept liability for corruption, > > interception or > > amendment, if any, or the consequences thereof. > > > > -- > > - > > > > > > > Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirusKit > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO
I set mine to ping the private IP of the other firewall, make sure ICMP is enabled though!!! On Friday 23 June 2006 10:21, Brian Neufeld wrote: > Please forgive the ignorant question, but one would put a private address > from the other side of the VPN in the keep alive field, correct? > > ~Brian > > > -Original Message- > > From: Holger Bauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 7:01 AM > > To: support@pfsense.com > > Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO > > > > > > Yes, I use it to make remote pfSenses at dynamic endpoints > > join automatically again after their IP has changed and to > > keep tunnels up even without traffic from clients keeping it alive. > > > > Holger > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Alvaro Pietrobono [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 3:50 PM > > > To: support@pfsense.com > > > Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel > > > > with CISCO > > > > > > Try "prefer older IPSEC SA" at system>advanced > > > > > > already done...is the same > > > > > > > Does disabling and enabling IPSEC at the pfSense solve the > > > > > > issue if the > > > > > > > cisco can't connect? > > > > > > Yes, it solve. disabling tunnel on Cisco and disabling and > > > enabling IPSEC at > > > the pfSense > > > connection goes up again without problem. > > > > > > > Also is one side of the setup at a dynamic IP and if so which one? > > > > > > No. both have static IP. > > > > > > I think this is a manual way and not automatic > > > At the bottom of IPsec configuration there is > > > a field "keep alive"does it work? > > > > > > ~Alvaro > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Holger Bauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: > > > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 12:58 PM > > > Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel > > > > with CISCO > > > > > Try "prefer older IPSEC SA" at system>advanced. Disable and > > > enable IPSEC at > > > the pfSense end to make sure the new settings are applied. > > > Does disabling > > > and enabling IPSEC at the pfSense solve the issue if the > > > > cisco can't > > > > > connect? From the logs it looks like the cisco doesn't > > > > answer to the > > > > > connection attempt of the pfSense. Also is one side of the > > > > setup at a > > > > > dynamic IP and if so which one? > > > > > > Holger > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Alvaro Pietrobono [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 11:33 AM > > > To: support@pfsense.com > > > Subject: [pfSense Support] Disconnections on VPN tunnel with CISCO > > > > > > > > > HI, > > > I have made a VPN from Cisco VPN Concentrator > > > to PfSense and all works fine, but when connection on Cisco > > > > side go > > > > > down for any reason the tunnel don't succeed to establish a > > > > new one. > > > > > From cisco side all seems ok but pfsense log same errors: > > > racoon: INFO: request for establishing IPsec-SA was queued > > > due to no phase1 > > > found > > > racoon: ERROR: phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. > > > 88bf18f7d1e83702: > > > > > > So I have to reboot PfSense to establish a new VPN. > > > > > > Do you think there is a way to resolve this problem? > > > > > > Thanx in advance. > > > > > > ~Alvaro > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A.PIetrobono > > > List Spa - ITALY > > > phone: +39050800151 > > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > web: www.list.it > > > > > > > > > > > > Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirusKit > > > > - > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ((( Internet Email Confidentiality Footer > > > > ))) > > > > > This e-mail, including any attachments, may contain > > > information that is > > > protected by law as privileged and confidential, and is > > > transmitted for > > > the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended > > > recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, > > > dissemination, copying > > > or retention of this e-mail or the information contained herein is > > > strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in > > > error, please > > > notify immediately the sender by telephone or reply by e-mail, and > > > permanently delete this e-mail from your computer system. > > > The statements and opinions expressed in this e-mail message are > > > those of the author of the message and do not necessarily represent > > > those of List Group S.p.A. Besides, the contents of this message > > > shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by List > > > > Group S.
Re: [pfSense Support] What happens if the soekris hardware is defective upon arrival? The Cortex Systems way.
"Dan Bond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Hi, > Might I be the first to recommend https://kd85.com/soekris.html for > all of your Soekris needs, am just a satisfied customer Wim is clearly a really serious soekris reseller for Europe, never heard any complaint about kd85, one of my friends has around 100 boxes all shipped by kd85 without any problem. Éric Masson -- Et puis, toutes ces couleurs dans l'écran, quelle horreur ! Je viens d'appeler Gaumont, ils disent qu'ils seraient très intéressés par une suite d'Hibernatus avec toi dans le rôle principal. -+- FM in Guide du Macounet Pervers : l'interface platine, y'a pire -+- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] Startup sound on FX5620 in slow-mo
Scott Ullrich wrote: For what its worth VMWARE does the same thing with a hard drive install unless you change the timing clock. With VMware, yeah, it's a timing issue. With the default timing clock, FreeBSD 6.x (incl. pfsense) VM's seem to advance about 1 second for every 2-3 seconds of real world and host system time. I've never seen a timing issue on physical hardware that wasn't solved by upgrading from a buggy BIOS revision (though I'm sure there's some cruddy hardware out there somewhere that has issues regardless). - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [pfSense Support] Startup sound on FX5620 in slow-mo
The nexcom 1041c does that too when used with the embedded image. It's NOT doing it when using the livecd or wwhen installed to hdd. However, there is no sideeffect other than annoying slow mo sound. Might be some timing difference we set for the embedded version to get better performance or whatever that affects this? Holger > -Original Message- > From: Chris Buechler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 10:28 PM > To: support@pfsense.com > Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Startup sound on FX5620 in slow-mo > > > Scott Ullrich wrote: > > For what its worth VMWARE does the same thing with a hard drive > > install unless you change the timing clock. > > With VMware, yeah, it's a timing issue. With the default > timing clock, > FreeBSD 6.x (incl. pfsense) VM's seem to advance about 1 second for > every 2-3 seconds of real world and host system time. I've > never seen a > timing issue on physical hardware that wasn't solved by > upgrading from a > buggy BIOS revision (though I'm sure there's some cruddy hardware out > there somewhere that has issues regardless). > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirusKit - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] Transcend IDE Flash drives
On 6/23/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: My Cheap CF Card I was using to kida test PFSense just Died. No fault to anything except that I used cheap hardware. I am looking at spending a little bit more money to get a transcend card to install it on. I just wanted to see if anyone out there is using the Transcend Flash drives and if so, what are you using and how does it work. I hate to spend money only to find it is not compatible. Thanks, Ryan (Sorry if this goes out more than once. My server is on drugs or something) I've got a couple Transcend 256's @45X in some of my machines. Work like a champ and haven't had any issues. I know a couple photographers that love them, think they're every bit as good as Sandisk or Lexar (which incidentally I've seen issues with when used as a IDE->CF hard drive) at considerably less cost. --Bill - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [pfSense Support] Transcend IDE Flash drives
Thanks for the reply. Anyone use the 512 meg or larger? thats what i was leaning toward. I'd like to go larger so I have plenty of room to change my mind. -Original Message- From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 5:02 PM To: support@pfsense.com Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Transcend IDE Flash drives On 6/23/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My Cheap CF Card I was using to kida test PFSense > just Died. No fault to anything except that I > used cheap hardware. I am looking at spending a > little bit more money to get a transcend card to > install it on. I just wanted to see if anyone > out there is using the Transcend Flash drives and > if so, what are you using and how does it work. > I hate to spend money only to find it is not > compatible. Thanks, Ryan > > (Sorry if this goes out more than once. My > server is on drugs or something) I've got a couple Transcend 256's @45X in some of my machines. Work like a champ and haven't had any issues. I know a couple photographers that love them, think they're every bit as good as Sandisk or Lexar (which incidentally I've seen issues with when used as a IDE->CF hard drive) at considerably less cost. --Bill - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [pfSense Support] Transcend IDE Flash drives
Thanks for the reply. Anyone use the 512 meg or larger? thats what i was leaning toward. I'd like to go larger so I have plenty of room to change my mind. -Original Message- From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 5:02 PM To: support@pfsense.com Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Transcend IDE Flash drives On 6/23/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My Cheap CF Card I was using to kida test PFSense > just Died. No fault to anything except that I > used cheap hardware. I am looking at spending a > little bit more money to get a transcend card to > install it on. I just wanted to see if anyone > out there is using the Transcend Flash drives and > if so, what are you using and how does it work. > I hate to spend money only to find it is not > compatible. Thanks, Ryan > > (Sorry if this goes out more than once. My > server is on drugs or something) I've got a couple Transcend 256's @45X in some of my machines. Work like a champ and haven't had any issues. I know a couple photographers that love them, think they're every bit as good as Sandisk or Lexar (which incidentally I've seen issues with when used as a IDE->CF hard drive) at considerably less cost. --Bill - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] What happens if the soekris hardware is defective upon arrival? The Cortex Systems way.
Jonathan Gonzalez wrote: I did a bank transfer for a soekris net4801-60 (256MB RAM) and other elements. When it arrived the hardware only recognizes 128MB of RAM. Can you reverse a bank transfer (like a charge back on a credit card?) -- If so, do it, send the box back COD (for the shipping expenses only) and let them figure it out. -- Our enemies are innovative and resourceful...They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we. -- George W. Bush 08/05/2004 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense Support] What happens if the soekris hardware is defective upon arrival? The Cortex Systems way.
Hi Eric, Eric Masson wrote on Fri, Jun 23 2006: >>Might I be the first to recommend https://kd85.com/soekris.html for >>all of your Soekris needs, am just a satisfied customer >Wim is clearly a really serious soekris reseller for Europe, never heard >any complaint about kd85, one of my friends has around 100 boxes all >shipped by kd85 without any problem. I only dealt with him two times but can second all positive experiences. Best regards Frederick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
