RE: [pfSense Support] WAN2 Setting Problem In Failover

[Tim Dickson]

>and in the WAN2 interface,I set Type to static,IP address to 
>192.168.1.254/32,Gateway to 192.168.1.1.


I believe you want it to be 192.168.1.254/24
Right now the gateway and static IP are in two different subnets.
-tim

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

[pfSense Support] WAN2 Setting Problem In Failover

[Abel Wang]

Dear  All,


I have set my leased line(static IP) in the WAN interface,and it is 
working fine.

Now I need to do a failover to it,however,the back up line is ADSL,
I have to use a router to do the PPPoe dial up,and connected the 
router(I have set it IP:192.168.1.1) to the soekris ETH2.
and in the WAN2 interface,I set Type to static,IP address to 
192.168.1.254/32,Gateway to 192.168.1.1.
but after I wrote a rule to let my computer go out through WAN2,I can 
not connect to the internet,

no problem for the router settings,as I have tested it.

Kindly give me a hand if you know how to solve,
Any suggestion will be appreciated,thanks in advance.

Best Regards,
Abel

RE: [pfSense Support] Re: NanoBSD on WRAP

[Simon Thomson]

-Original Message-
From: Duncan Hall [mailto:dun...@viator.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 16 December 2009 8:47 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Re: NanoBSD on WRAP

Simon Thomson wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Pingle [mailto:li...@pingle.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, 15 December 2009 9:07 PM
> To: support@pfsense.com
> Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Re: NanoBSD on WRAP
>
> On 12/15/2009 6:31 AM, Rainer Duffner wrote:
>   
>> Ugo Bellavance schrieb:
>> 
>>> I like this answer, and there are really 2 facts that are highlighted
>>> here:
>>>
>>> - Users will always complain
>>> - The better your product and product history, the less users will
>>> read the warnings.  PfSense has always had a good record to me, so I
>>> don't read the upgrade document at each upgrade.
>>>
>>> I'll wait for the image, Chris, and I don't mind the few weeks of
>>> wait, but I think that maybe uploading a (or a set of) README files on
>>> the mirror would help... I would personnally be very tempted to read a
>>> README file while it is downloading, especially if it has "WRAP" in
>>> its name.
>>>
>>>   
>
>   
>> That might help, but it is mentioned in the Upgrade Guide, and a couple
>> places on the Doc Wiki. I thought it was mentioned in the release
>> announcement, but I may have been thinking about one of the -RC version
>> announcements.
>> 
>
>   
>> I upgraded my ALIX yesterday to 1.2.3-RELEASE and found out I need the
>> BIOS-update (I switched from 128M embedded to 4GB version, too). Turns
>> out that the image for the BIOS-update provided on the pfSense.org page
>> doesn't work (maybe it's for a different ALIX, I have an ALIX2-series
>> board).
>> Of course, I only found out about this after I had wiped my working
>> pfSense installation with the BIOS-update image (and no old image
>> available, and no internet-access anymore).
>>
>> Luckily, I was able to tether my iMac with my on-call iPhone (the
>> personal iPhone doesn't have 3G reception at home) and download the
>> required files from the pcengines website and finally run 1.2.3 - after
>> a couple of wasted hours.
>>
>> So much for "a ready-made image makes it easier for everybody"
>> 
>
>   
>>> Which model ALIX do you have? It says on the page that there are some
>>> excluded models, usually it's the ones with VGA that require a different
>>> BIOS. Did the image not boot at all? Or what did it do?
>>>   
>
>   
>>> Jim
>>>   
>
> I have run into this issue also, although I am still in the planning stage of 
> an upgrade.
> We are running pfsense 1.2.2 on an Alix2c3 board.
> I know I need to upgrade the bios prior to installing pfsense 1.2.3-RELEASE 
> but everywhere I look for an updated bios this model is expressly excluded.
>
> Regards,
> Simon.
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
> For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com
>
> Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
>
>   
>I have several Alix2c3 boards that I purchased up from www.yawarra.com.au

>I upgraded the bios to 0.99h as per the instructions here: 
>http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/ALIX_BIOS_Update_Procedure

>Now happily running the 4 gig Nano version of 1.2.3

>Regards,

>Duncan

Cheers Duncan, it's good to know it can be done.
I'd read that page but miss read the first line and thought it excluded the 
Alix2c3.
It seems we are both happy yawarra customers.

Regards,
Simon.




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

Re: [pfSense Support] Re: NanoBSD on WRAP

[Duncan Hall]

Simon Thomson wrote:

-Original Message-
From: Jim Pingle [mailto:li...@pingle.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, 15 December 2009 9:07 PM

To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Re: NanoBSD on WRAP

On 12/15/2009 6:31 AM, Rainer Duffner wrote:
  

Ugo Bellavance schrieb:


I like this answer, and there are really 2 facts that are highlighted
here:

- Users will always complain
- The better your product and product history, the less users will
read the warnings.  PfSense has always had a good record to me, so I
don't read the upgrade document at each upgrade.

I'll wait for the image, Chris, and I don't mind the few weeks of
wait, but I think that maybe uploading a (or a set of) README files on
the mirror would help... I would personnally be very tempted to read a
README file while it is downloading, especially if it has "WRAP" in
its name.

  


  

That might help, but it is mentioned in the Upgrade Guide, and a couple
places on the Doc Wiki. I thought it was mentioned in the release
announcement, but I may have been thinking about one of the -RC version
announcements.



  

I upgraded my ALIX yesterday to 1.2.3-RELEASE and found out I need the
BIOS-update (I switched from 128M embedded to 4GB version, too). Turns
out that the image for the BIOS-update provided on the pfSense.org page
doesn't work (maybe it's for a different ALIX, I have an ALIX2-series
board).
Of course, I only found out about this after I had wiped my working
pfSense installation with the BIOS-update image (and no old image
available, and no internet-access anymore).

Luckily, I was able to tether my iMac with my on-call iPhone (the
personal iPhone doesn't have 3G reception at home) and download the
required files from the pcengines website and finally run 1.2.3 - after
a couple of wasted hours.

So much for "a ready-made image makes it easier for everybody"



  

Which model ALIX do you have? It says on the page that there are some
excluded models, usually it's the ones with VGA that require a different
BIOS. Did the image not boot at all? Or what did it do?
  


  

Jim
  


I have run into this issue also, although I am still in the planning stage of 
an upgrade.
We are running pfsense 1.2.2 on an Alix2c3 board.
I know I need to upgrade the bios prior to installing pfsense 1.2.3-RELEASE but 
everywhere I look for an updated bios this model is expressly excluded.

Regards,
Simon.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

  

I have several Alix2c3 boards that I purchased up from www.yawarra.com.au

I upgraded the bios to 0.99h as per the instructions here: 
http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/ALIX_BIOS_Update_Procedure


Now happily running the 4 gig Nano version of 1.2.3

Regards,

Duncan




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

RE: [pfSense Support] Re: NanoBSD on WRAP

[Simon Thomson]

-Original Message-
From: Jim Pingle [mailto:li...@pingle.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, 15 December 2009 9:07 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Re: NanoBSD on WRAP

On 12/15/2009 6:31 AM, Rainer Duffner wrote:
> Ugo Bellavance schrieb:
>> I like this answer, and there are really 2 facts that are highlighted
>> here:
>>
>> - Users will always complain
>> - The better your product and product history, the less users will
>> read the warnings.  PfSense has always had a good record to me, so I
>> don't read the upgrade document at each upgrade.
>>
>> I'll wait for the image, Chris, and I don't mind the few weeks of
>> wait, but I think that maybe uploading a (or a set of) README files on
>> the mirror would help... I would personnally be very tempted to read a
>> README file while it is downloading, especially if it has "WRAP" in
>> its name.
>>

>That might help, but it is mentioned in the Upgrade Guide, and a couple
>places on the Doc Wiki. I thought it was mentioned in the release
>announcement, but I may have been thinking about one of the -RC version
>announcements.

> I upgraded my ALIX yesterday to 1.2.3-RELEASE and found out I need the
> BIOS-update (I switched from 128M embedded to 4GB version, too). Turns
> out that the image for the BIOS-update provided on the pfSense.org page
> doesn't work (maybe it's for a different ALIX, I have an ALIX2-series
> board).
> Of course, I only found out about this after I had wiped my working
> pfSense installation with the BIOS-update image (and no old image
> available, and no internet-access anymore).
> 
> Luckily, I was able to tether my iMac with my on-call iPhone (the
> personal iPhone doesn't have 3G reception at home) and download the
> required files from the pcengines website and finally run 1.2.3 - after
> a couple of wasted hours.
> 
> So much for "a ready-made image makes it easier for everybody"

>>Which model ALIX do you have? It says on the page that there are some
>>excluded models, usually it's the ones with VGA that require a different
>>BIOS. Did the image not boot at all? Or what did it do?

>>Jim

I have run into this issue also, although I am still in the planning stage of 
an upgrade.
We are running pfsense 1.2.2 on an Alix2c3 board.
I know I need to upgrade the bios prior to installing pfsense 1.2.3-RELEASE but 
everywhere I look for an updated bios this model is expressly excluded.

Regards,
Simon.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

Re: [pfSense Support] Windows Network functionality/auto-sensing lacking.

[Keenan Tims]

> Got a small issue here.  Basically, I replaced a DLINK router with a base 
> pfSense setup.  Now, although all of my machines can ping one another, they 
> don't seem to be auto-sensing one another -- no machines show up in Network 
> Neighborhood, etc.  Are there any special items or special firewall rules I 
> need to enable to get my "normal" Windows network functionality back?

If you enable the 'Register DHCP leases in DNS forwarder' option in the
DNS Forwarder settings you should find this works much better.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [pfSense Support] Windows Network functionality/auto-sensing lacking.

[Seth Mos]

Op 15 dec 2009, om 22:03 heeft li...@mgreg.com het volgende geschreven:

> Got a small issue here.  Basically, I replaced a DLINK router with a base 
> pfSense setup.  Now, although all of my machines can ping one another, they 
> don't seem to be auto-sensing one another -- no machines show up in Network 
> Neighborhood, etc.  Are there any special items or special firewall rules I 
> need to enable to get my "normal" Windows network functionality back?

This is probably because of the way windows handles netbios announcements.

Consider rebooting all of the, if they are dhcp to should properly fall back to 
broadcast mode.

If that fails you can configure a wins server in the dhcp server settings.

Regards,

Seth
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

[pfSense Support] Windows Network functionality/auto-sensing lacking.

[li...@mgreg.com]

Hi All,

Got a small issue here.  Basically, I replaced a DLINK router with a base 
pfSense setup.  Now, although all of my machines can ping one another, they 
don't seem to be auto-sensing one another -- no machines show up in Network 
Neighborhood, etc.  Are there any special items or special firewall rules I 
need to enable to get my "normal" Windows network functionality back?

Best,
Michael
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

Re: [pfSense Support] Captive Portal RADIUS authentication - "Authentication error - Username and/or password invalid"

[Michael Vinocur]

I see. Well the the only other thing I can think of is the password type i.e. 
m5,chap, etc must be different between the moonwall and pfsesnse boxes.

Mike


From: Tancinco, Jon 
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 11:51 AM
To: support@pfsense.com 
Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Captive Portal RADIUS authentication - 
"Authentication error - Username and/or password invalid"


Hi Mike.

 

The authentication requests go through to the Radius server...and we get a bad 
password error.

 

It's weird.  All the same settings work under m0n0wall.  Same IPs, same radius 
server.  I'm not sure how different pfSense is compared to the m0n0wall app.  
The Captive Portal setup looks identical to me, unless there is some underlying 
difference between the two applications.

 

Thanks your your help.

 

 

-Jon

 

From: Michael Vinocur [mailto:michaelvino...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2009 6:31 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Captive Portal RADIUS authentication - 
"Authentication error - Username and/or password invalid"

 

The external IP of the radius server has to be added to the radius servers 
client list or else it will reject authentication requests.

 

Mike 

 

From: Tancinco, Jon 

Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 5:43 PM

To: support@pfsense.com 

Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Captive Portal RADIUS authentication - 
"Authentication error - Username and/or password invalid"

 

Secret key works under m0n0wall and the same key is used in pfSense.  Not sure 
what you mean about the IP of the NAS.

 

Thanks for your help!

 

 

Jon

 

From: Michael Vinocur [mailto:michaelvino...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:28 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Captive Portal RADIUS authentication - 
"Authentication error - Username and/or password invalid"

 

Could be the secret key or check is you added the IP of the NAS.

 

Mike

 

From: Tancinco, Jon 

Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 11:37 AM

To: support@pfsense.com 

Subject: [pfSense Support] Captive Portal RADIUS authentication - 
"Authentication error - Username and/or password invalid"

 

Same error on Versions 1.2.2 and 1.2.3


Using the pfSense Captive Portal. I am getting the "Authentication error - 
Username and/or password invalid." message when trying to authenticate. The 
password is correctly submitted, but get the error everytime. RADIUS server 
reports incorrect password. Using m0n0wall, Captive Portal and RADIUS 
authentication works with no problems using the same username, password and 
RADIUS server.

Any help would be appreciated.

 

 

 

 

Jon

 

RE: [pfSense Support] Captive Portal RADIUS authentication - "Authentication error - Username and/or password invalid"

[Tancinco, Jon]

Hi Mike.

 

The authentication requests go through to the Radius server...and we get
a bad password error.

 

It's weird.  All the same settings work under m0n0wall.  Same IPs, same
radius server.  I'm not sure how different pfSense is compared to the
m0n0wall app.  The Captive Portal setup looks identical to me, unless
there is some underlying difference between the two applications.

 

Thanks your your help.

 

 

-Jon

 

From: Michael Vinocur [mailto:michaelvino...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2009 6:31 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Captive Portal RADIUS authentication -
"Authentication error - Username and/or password invalid"

 

The external IP of the radius server has to be added to the radius
servers client list or else it will reject authentication requests.

 

Mike 

 

From: Tancinco, Jon   

Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 5:43 PM

To: support@pfsense.com 

Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Captive Portal RADIUS authentication -
"Authentication error - Username and/or password invalid"

 

Secret key works under m0n0wall and the same key is used in pfSense.
Not sure what you mean about the IP of the NAS.

 

Thanks for your help!

 

 

Jon

 

From: Michael Vinocur [mailto:michaelvino...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:28 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Captive Portal RADIUS authentication -
"Authentication error - Username and/or password invalid"

 

Could be the secret key or check is you added the IP of the NAS.

 

Mike

 

From: Tancinco, Jon   

Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 11:37 AM

To: support@pfsense.com 

Subject: [pfSense Support] Captive Portal RADIUS authentication -
"Authentication error - Username and/or password invalid"

 

Same error on Versions 1.2.2 and 1.2.3


Using the pfSense Captive Portal. I am getting the "Authentication error
- Username and/or password invalid." message when trying to
authenticate. The password is correctly submitted, but get the error
everytime. RADIUS server reports incorrect password. Using m0n0wall,
Captive Portal and RADIUS authentication works with no problems using
the same username, password and RADIUS server.

Any help would be appreciated.

 

 

 

 

Jon

 

Re: [pfSense Support] potential pfsense hardware

[Paul Mansfield]

On 15/12/09 14:35, Seth Mos wrote:
> Paul Mansfield schreef:
>> On 14/12/09 23:47, Jeppe Øland wrote:
>>> As for the PCIe wireless card: it's a MSI brand card, using a Ralink
>>> NIC.
>>> (MS-6894, Ralink chip: RTL8187SE)
>>> I guess thats a RealTek wireless card ... probably next to useless for
>>> pfSense or?
>>
>> realtek != ralink
> 
> I've previously have had quite good success with Ralink wireless chips
> (ral) under FreeBSD. Even with the usb Ralink chips (ural).

yeah, ralink hardware has a pretty good community of driver developers



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

Re: [pfSense Support] potential pfsense hardware

[Seth Mos]

Paul Mansfield schreef:

On 14/12/09 23:47, Jeppe Øland wrote:

As for the PCIe wireless card: it's a MSI brand card, using a Ralink NIC.
(MS-6894, Ralink chip: RTL8187SE)
I guess thats a RealTek wireless card ... probably next to useless for
pfSense or?


realtek != ralink


I've previously have had quite good success with Ralink wireless chips 
(ral) under FreeBSD. Even with the usb Ralink chips (ural).


Regards,

Seth

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

Re: [pfSense Support] potential pfsense hardware

[Paul Mansfield]

On 14/12/09 23:47, Jeppe Øland wrote:
> As for the PCIe wireless card: it's a MSI brand card, using a Ralink NIC.
> (MS-6894, Ralink chip: RTL8187SE)
> I guess thats a RealTek wireless card ... probably next to useless for
> pfSense or?

realtek != ralink

yup, that's a realtek

since reading some comments in the linux kernel device driver for
realtek ethernet chips, I know it's not just snobbery that keeps people
away!

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

Re: [pfSense Support] Re: NanoBSD on WRAP

[Rainer Duffner]

Jim Pingle schrieb:
>
> Which model ALIX do you have? 

alix2d1

according to the receipt.


> It says on the page that there are some
> excluded models, usually it's the ones with VGA that require a different
> BIOS. Did the image not boot at all? Or what did it do?
>   

IIRC, the ALIX basically said that it didn't find a boot-disk.
OSX makes it dead-easy to mount those img-files and add some stuff, so
it was not that difficult to do.
Just time-consuming.
I had never touched that BIOS before (been using a WRAP with pfSense
since late 2005) and so I needed some time to realize that it's not my
stupidity.
;-)



Rainer




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

Re: [pfSense Support] Re: NanoBSD on WRAP

[Jim Pingle]

On 12/15/2009 6:31 AM, Rainer Duffner wrote:
> Ugo Bellavance schrieb:
>> I like this answer, and there are really 2 facts that are highlighted
>> here:
>>
>> - Users will always complain
>> - The better your product and product history, the less users will
>> read the warnings.  PfSense has always had a good record to me, so I
>> don't read the upgrade document at each upgrade.
>>
>> I'll wait for the image, Chris, and I don't mind the few weeks of
>> wait, but I think that maybe uploading a (or a set of) README files on
>> the mirror would help... I would personnally be very tempted to read a
>> README file while it is downloading, especially if it has "WRAP" in
>> its name.
>>

That might help, but it is mentioned in the Upgrade Guide, and a couple
places on the Doc Wiki. I thought it was mentioned in the release
announcement, but I may have been thinking about one of the -RC version
announcements.

> I upgraded my ALIX yesterday to 1.2.3-RELEASE and found out I need the
> BIOS-update (I switched from 128M embedded to 4GB version, too). Turns
> out that the image for the BIOS-update provided on the pfSense.org page
> doesn't work (maybe it's for a different ALIX, I have an ALIX2-series
> board).
> Of course, I only found out about this after I had wiped my working
> pfSense installation with the BIOS-update image (and no old image
> available, and no internet-access anymore).
> 
> Luckily, I was able to tether my iMac with my on-call iPhone (the
> personal iPhone doesn't have 3G reception at home) and download the
> required files from the pcengines website and finally run 1.2.3 - after
> a couple of wasted hours.
> 
> So much for "a ready-made image makes it easier for everybody"

Which model ALIX do you have? It says on the page that there are some
excluded models, usually it's the ones with VGA that require a different
BIOS. Did the image not boot at all? Or what did it do?

Jim


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

Re: [pfSense Support] Re: NanoBSD on WRAP

[Rainer Duffner]

Ugo Bellavance schrieb:
> On 2009-12-14 22:17, Chris Buechler wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Scott Ullrich 
>> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Ugo Bellavance  wrote:
 Hi,

 http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/NanoBSD_on_WRAP

 Has someone done the first step what would be kind enough to put the
 resulting image available for download?  I worked a few hours on
 this before
 discovering that article, and I don't have much time to setup a
 separate
 freebsd/pfsense box to do the changes.
>>>
>>> If we where to do this then nobody would read the page and they would
>>> then complain later down the road when they finally learn the
>>> limitations of the image.
>>>
>>
>> People will complain no matter what, even when the cause is a hardware
>> bug outside our control. I plan on eventually uploading an image ready
>> to write, for download on the above linked page, after the text
>> showing the warnings. No sense in making all WRAP users jump through
>> the same hoops. Eventually being whenever I have time, which won't be
>> this week.
>
> I tried to write a decent reply to Scott a couple of times, and I
> decided not to answer because I felt he could get upset with my answer
> (and it wasn't my goal), maybe because my English is not good enough,
> or maybe there wasn't a way.
>
> I like this answer, and there are really 2 facts that are highlighted
> here:
>
> - Users will always complain
> - The better your product and product history, the less users will
> read the warnings.  PfSense has always had a good record to me, so I
> don't read the upgrade document at each upgrade.
>
> I'll wait for the image, Chris, and I don't mind the few weeks of
> wait, but I think that maybe uploading a (or a set of) README files on
> the mirror would help... I would personnally be very tempted to read a
> README file while it is downloading, especially if it has "WRAP" in
> its name.
>

I upgraded my ALIX yesterday to 1.2.3-RELEASE and found out I need the
BIOS-update (I switched from 128M embedded to 4GB version, too). Turns
out that the image for the BIOS-update provided on the pfSense.org page
doesn't work (maybe it's for a different ALIX, I have an ALIX2-series
board).
Of course, I only found out about this after I had wiped my working
pfSense installation with the BIOS-update image (and no old image
available, and no internet-access anymore).

Luckily, I was able to tether my iMac with my on-call iPhone (the
personal iPhone doesn't have 3G reception at home) and download the
required files from the pcengines website and finally run 1.2.3 - after
a couple of wasted hours.

So much for "a ready-made image makes it easier for everybody"




Rainer


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

[pfSense Support] Re: NanoBSD on WRAP

[Ugo Bellavance]

On 2009-12-14 22:17, Chris Buechler wrote:

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Scott Ullrich  wrote:

On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Ugo Bellavance  wrote:

Hi,

http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/NanoBSD_on_WRAP

Has someone done the first step what would be kind enough to put the
resulting image available for download?  I worked a few hours on this before
discovering that article, and I don't have much time to setup a separate
freebsd/pfsense box to do the changes.


If we where to do this then nobody would read the page and they would
then complain later down the road when they finally learn the
limitations of the image.



People will complain no matter what, even when the cause is a hardware
bug outside our control. I plan on eventually uploading an image ready
to write, for download on the above linked page, after the text
showing the warnings. No sense in making all WRAP users jump through
the same hoops. Eventually being whenever I have time, which won't be
this week.


I tried to write a decent reply to Scott a couple of times, and I 
decided not to answer because I felt he could get upset with my answer 
(and it wasn't my goal), maybe because my English is not good enough, or 
maybe there wasn't a way.


I like this answer, and there are really 2 facts that are highlighted here:

- Users will always complain
- The better your product and product history, the less users will read 
the warnings.  PfSense has always had a good record to me, so I don't 
read the upgrade document at each upgrade.


I'll wait for the image, Chris, and I don't mind the few weeks of wait, 
but I think that maybe uploading a (or a set of) README files on the 
mirror would help... I would personnally be very tempted to read a 
README file while it is downloading, especially if it has "WRAP" in its 
name.


BTW, I just found out that the PfSense Book is available on Amazon, I'll 
order one very soon !


Regards,

Ugo


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org