On 21.12.2012 05:27, Nishant Sharma wrote:
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Cristian Del Carlo
cristian.delca...@gmail.com wrote:
In lan e openvpn i have only one rule that pass everything.
This problem make me crazy
Have you configured the server for pushing the routes to client and
I had a similar problem where pfSense wouldn't route packets to remote LAN
over tunnel (it was due to a gateway issue and it wasn't using the default
routes) I think someone mentioned a similar issue.
Maybe it would be worth trying adding an additional gateway (10.100.8.1 or
.2 depending on which
single /24 to single 24 site2site needs no push of routes
only if multiple subnets are on end of tunnel and not described in VPN
info/routing
I would simplyfy this issue to a simple site2site vpn
additional:
- is it a plain v2 install, or an upgraded v1.2.x to v2
I had some isues with upgrades
info here:
http://blog.pfsense.org/?p=676
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Awesome work guys, looking forward to 2.1!
Regards,
James
Sent from my BlackBerry
- Original Message -
From: Chris Buechler [mailto:c...@pfsense.org]
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 08:39 AM
To: pfSense support and discussion list@lists.pfsense.org
Subject: [pfSense] 2.0.2 release now
- Original Message -
info here:
http://blog.pfsense.org/?p=676
And just in time for insert your holiday preferrence here! Fantastic! Thanks
for your amazing software, and brilliant work!
--Tim
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 08:44:29AM -0700, James Caldwell wrote:
Awesome work guys, looking forward to 2.1!
2.1BETA1 has been working quite well for me
(at home, at least).
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
I'm always a little leary of the 'beta' term. Once you guys stamp it as a
release quality build I'll move up to it no problem.
James
-Original Message-
From: list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org [mailto:list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org] On
Behalf Of Eugen Leitl
Sent: December-21-12 9:37 AM
On 21/12/12 11:31 pm, James Caldwell wrote:
I'm always a little leary of the 'beta' term. Once you guys stamp it as a
release quality build I'll move up to it no problem.
If you want v6 support, you don't get a lot of choice at the moment :-)
FWIW, I've been using 2.1 nightlies in
On Dec 21, 2012, at 5:52 PM, Chris Bagnall pfse...@lists.minotaur.cc wrote:
On 21/12/12 11:31 pm, James Caldwell wrote:
I'm always a little leary of the 'beta' term. Once you guys stamp it as a
release quality build I'll move up to it no problem.
If you want v6 support, you don't get a
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Jim Thompson j...@netgate.com wrote:
We dogfood 2.1 at BSD Perimeter as well. :-)
Indeed, everywhere. We don't have any production 2.0.x installs, our
office, all our colo facilities, and all our home systems are running
2.1.
That's great to know it's been thoroughly tested out in the wild already and
still considered in beta. If it's already stable enough to run as your primary
version, what's left before 2.1 goes release?
James
-Original Message-
From: list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org
12 matches
Mail list logo
