Re: [pfSense-discussion] Traffic shaper bug ?

2008-03-24 Thread Jan Hoevers
Bill Marquette wrote on 23-3-2008 18:54: PS. It's probably worth noting that I'm also the author of the existing annoying wizard. Sorry about that qualification Bill. The fact that it cannot be bypassed annoyed me, not the wizard itself. Jan

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Traffic shaper bug ?

2008-03-24 Thread Jan Hoevers
Bill Marquette wrote on 23-3-2008 18:52: Seeing as how the feature is targeted for 1.3 and we don't have public 1.3 test images (hello, we JUST released 1.2) yet, it will be difficult for those that have donated to the feature to test that it's actually been done right. The easiest way for Ermal

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Traffic shaper bug ?

2008-03-23 Thread Jan Hoevers
Ermal Luçi wrote on 23-3-2008 11:08: On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Jan Hoevers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Chris Buechler wrote on 23-3-2008 8:51: Jan Hoevers wrote: >> While not unwilling to donate to projects, this bounty thing is not for >> me because of a strict

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Traffic shaper bug ?

2008-03-23 Thread Jan Hoevers
Chris Buechler wrote on 23-3-2008 8:51: Jan Hoevers wrote: While not unwilling to donate to projects, this bounty thing is not for me because of a strict open source policy. Again, is there any estimate for 1.3? This is 100% completely open source. The source ported to RELENG_1_2 is even in

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Traffic shaper bug ?

2008-03-22 Thread Jan Hoevers
Scott Ullrich wrote on 22-3-2008 23:42: On 3/22/08, RB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: For that matter, is any non-dev actually _running_ 1.3? For quite some time, short of building the whole system myself, performing an update to a fresh test system just results in complete b0rkage (libraries mi

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Traffic shaper bug ?

2008-03-21 Thread Jan Hoevers
ying *both* the incoming and outgoing interface. ALTQ has that option, so perhaps you are planning that already. best regards, Jan Hoevers

Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service

2008-03-07 Thread Jan Hoevers
you would need to run ntpd on a dedicated box (and maybe even you would want to be a pool member). I know your questions were already answered, but maybe this clarifies a bit more. regards, Jan Hoevers

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Alias edit

2008-02-19 Thread Jan Hoevers
would make the GUI feel much more consistant and reliable. Jan Hoevers

Re: [pfSense-discussion] bogons update issue

2008-02-10 Thread Jan Hoevers
Jan Hoevers wrote on 11-2-2008 0:30: Scott Ullrich wrote on 10-2-2008 23:06: On 2/10/08, Jan Hoevers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've tested this now on a fresh install, and you're right, it will work on existing installs. The missing od issue is of course still there, but unli

Re: [pfSense-discussion] bogons update issue

2008-02-10 Thread Jan Hoevers
Scott Ullrich wrote on 10-2-2008 23:06: On 2/10/08, Jan Hoevers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've tested this now on a fresh install, and you're right, it will work on existing installs. The missing od issue is of course still there, but unlike I wrote in my original mail, it do

Re: [pfSense-discussion] bogons update issue

2008-02-10 Thread Jan Hoevers
Chris Buechler wrote on 4-2-2008 0:32: Jan Hoevers wrote: 2. On previous versions the bogons file was fetched from cymru.com, but on RC4 the script tries to get it from a pfSense server. The file is however missing on that pfSense server. I worked around this by copying the old cymru url back

[pfSense-discussion] bogons update issue

2008-02-03 Thread Jan Hoevers
t team finds time to look into this before the next release. best regards, Jan Hoevers