Re: [pfSense] Bug in pfSense v2.1

2012-11-08 Thread Ermal Luçi
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 3:28 AM, Oliver Schad oliver.sc...@automatic-server.com wrote: Hi all, I've found a bug in the latest development version v2.1 If you use a carp device a NAT rule is generated which source nats any outgoing packet to the carp IP. You can do that if the device is in

Re: [pfSense] Bug in pfSense v2.1

2012-11-08 Thread Oliver Schad
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:14:50 +0100 Ermal Luçi e...@pfsense.org wrote: Can you describe the scenario on this? Why you are expecting traffic on the backup to be rolling normally when the device its for HA? There are many reasons - debugging network (does the second device work? if the first

Re: [pfSense] Bug in pfSense v2.1

2012-11-08 Thread Oliver Schad
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:53:55 +0100 Oliver Schad oliver.sc...@automatic-server.com wrote: On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:14:50 +0100 Ermal Luçi e...@pfsense.org wrote: Can you describe the scenario on this? Why you are expecting traffic on the backup to be rolling normally when the device its for

Re: [pfSense] Bug in pfSense v2.1

2012-11-08 Thread Ermal Luçi
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Oliver Schad oliver.sc...@automatic-server.com wrote: On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:53:55 +0100 Oliver Schad oliver.sc...@automatic-server.com wrote: On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:14:50 +0100 Ermal Luçi e...@pfsense.org wrote: Can you describe the scenario on this?

Re: [pfSense] Bug in pfSense v2.1

2012-11-08 Thread Oliver Schad
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 12:44:11 +0100 Ermal Luçi e...@pfsense.org wrote: On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Oliver Schad oliver.sc...@automatic-server.com wrote: On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:14:50 +0100 Ermal Luçi e...@pfsense.org wrote: Can you describe the scenario on this? Why you are

Re: [pfSense] Bug in pfSense v2.1

2012-11-08 Thread Michael Schuh
2012/11/8 Ermal Luçi e...@pfsense.org: On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Oliver Schad oliver.sc...@automatic-server.com wrote: On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:14:50 +0100 Ermal Luçi e...@pfsense.org wrote: Can you describe the scenario on this? Why you are expecting traffic on the backup to be

Re: [pfSense] Bug in pfSense v2.1

2012-11-08 Thread Ermal Luçi
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Michael Schuh michael.sc...@gmail.comwrote: 2012/11/8 Ermal Luçi e...@pfsense.org: On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Oliver Schad oliver.sc...@automatic-server.com wrote: On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:14:50 +0100 Ermal Luçi e...@pfsense.org wrote: Can

Re: [pfSense] Bug in pfSense v2.1

2012-11-08 Thread Ermal Luçi
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Oliver Schad oliver.sc...@automatic-server.com wrote: On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 12:45:20 +0100 Ermal Luçi e...@pfsense.org wrote: On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Oliver Schad oliver.sc...@automatic-server.com wrote: On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:53:55 +0100

Re: [pfSense] Bug in pfSense v2.1

2012-11-08 Thread Michael Schuh
2012/11/8 Ermal Luçi e...@pfsense.org: On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Michael Schuh michael.sc...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/11/8 Ermal Luçi e...@pfsense.org: On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Oliver Schad oliver.sc...@automatic-server.com wrote: On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:14:50 +0100

Re: [pfSense] Strange problem after auto update

2012-11-08 Thread Jerome Alet
Hi, Just to let you know that this 2.1 snapshot : FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE-p4 #1: Thu Nov 8 11:35:37 EST 2012 Fixes my problem. Now the slave can ping and do DNS queries at will, as expected (at least as I expected). bye, and thanks for your work guys ! -- Jérôme Alet -