i just tried the latest 0.73.8 pfsense.
still same error.
??
> On 8/4/05, Scott Ullrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Fixed in CVS. Thanks.
> >
> > On 8/4/05, denny halim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > one more thing.
> > >
> > > just found out there's error on the web config page:
>
Hi to all,
I'm testing 0.74-embedded on a WRAP 1E board. In "INTERFACES: OPT1"
when I set the SSID name and I desactive the hide SSID option and I
check in "status, interfaces" the SSID is "HIDE" and not what I wrote.
On the terminal shell with ifconfig I get the right ESSID (what I
wrote) but stil
Everyone,
Hope the hack-a-thon went well.
I have had a strange happening since ver.0.73.0
every time I apply an full-package-upgrade it
seemingly corrupts the state table and then I get
NO traffic past the pfSense box.
AUDIT TRAIL:
Running a clean 0.68.x install
upgrade to 0.73.0 --- all
Hi.
Just a small bug:
Having netmask set with /32 should make it impossible to add an IP of default
gw outside that scope.
I accidently set /32 instead of /24 which led to numerous problems.
Cheers,
YazzY
-
To unsubscribe, e-ma
Hi.
One more bug. CTRL+C does not work in shell. It's propably not escaped from the
main menu.
Simple ping will go for ever.
Cheers,
YazzY
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROT
Howdy.
Lastest Firefox seems to have problems with metallic skin's java script.
The "System" menu shows undermenu instead (Backup/Restore, Command, Edit file,
Factory, Halt system, Ping, Reboot system, States) when pointing mouse at it.
It's e.g impossible to chose "Advanced" from the menu.
Chee
Hi.
Enabling your custom NAT rules and then chosing "Save" for "Enable advanced
outbound NAT" will reenable default NATing rules.
Cheers.
YazzY
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAI
Found one more issue. Look for the fixes in the next version. Not
sure when it will be out however.
On 8/8/05, denny halim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i just tried the latest 0.73.8 pfsense.
>
> still same error.
> ??
>
>
>
> > On 8/4/05, Scott Ullrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> >
following error
occurs when trying to add a new ipsec tunnel version
0.74
XML error: not well-formed (invalid token) at line 248
On 8/8/05, David Strout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[useless stuff snipped]
> I also notice scrolling ALERTS about an error
> parsing the /tmp/rules.debug
What line in /tmp/rules.debug and what does the line say? Thats the culprit.
-
What does line 248 of /cf/conf/config.xml show?
On 8/8/05, alan walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> following error occurs when trying to add a new ipsec tunnel version 0.74
>
>
>
> XML error: not well-formed (invalid token) at line 248
--
There seems to be problems
with firewall rules in 0.74
I am having problems with the
user defined rules sometimes it seems ok and sometimes it needs acouple of reboots for the rules to work.
Example block all lan to 192.168.0.1:443.
Would normally causse a problem
alan
Should be fixed. Our gettytab was out of sync.
On 8/8/05, Marcin Jessa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> One more bug. CTRL+C does not work in shell. It's propably not escaped from
> the main menu.
> Simple ping will go for ever.
>
> Cheers,
> YazzY
>
>
This happens when you need to clear the cache from firefox. Clear the
cache and try again.
On 8/8/05, Marcin Jessa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Howdy.
>
> Lastest Firefox seems to have problems with metallic skin's java script.
> The "System" menu shows undermenu instead (Backup/Restore, Command
I also get a very weird happening w/ the 0.74.0
ver ... when I upgraded I started seeing this
message on the console .
XML error: TUNNEL at line 554 cannot occur more
than once
I have multiple VPNs defined (each subsection
starting w/ directives).
It seen to read in the first tunnel inf
Can you send me a screenshot of the problem? Kinda hard for me to diagnos
the problem without it. Also is it happening on all pages? From what I can
tell from your description, this isn't happening to me, so any additional
information would be helpful. Thanks!
-Erik (Esotericisms)
On Mon, 8 Au
I know this is a difficult question but I would like to know wheaether there is anyNative support in pfsense to make a basic ptp tunnel either with gre or just ppp. I have been playing with routing all my traffic over ipsec but am having issues withVOIP and ptpp tunnels within the ipsec tunne
Please open a ticket for this item at
http://cvstrac.pfsense.com/tktnew and include as much info as
possible.
On 8/8/05, Marcin Jessa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Enabling your custom NAT rules and then chosing "Save" for "Enable advanced
> outbound NAT" will reenable default NATing rule
Please open a ticket for this at http://cvstrac.pfsense.com/tktnew and
include as much info as possible.
On 8/8/05, Giorgio Ducci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi to all,
> I'm testing 0.74-embedded on a WRAP 1E board. In "INTERFACES: OPT1"
> when I set the SSID name and I desactive the hide SSID o
Please open a ticket for this at http://cvstrac.pfsense.com/tktnew and
include as much info as possible.
On 8/8/05, alan walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> There seems to be problems with firewall rules in 0.74
>
> I am having problems with the user defined rules sometimes it seems
Erm, I think I broke it.
Either apply:
http://cvstrac.pfsense.com/patchset?cn=5298
or use the edit file option in the diag menu and replace
/etc/inc/xmlparse.inc with:
http://cvstrac.pfsense.com/getfile/pfSense/etc/inc/xmlparse.inc?v=1.29
--Bill
On 8/8/05, David Strout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just looking for a quick blah on how the incoming load
balancer should work
Well just thought to say thanks to the fine work you all
achieved in the weekend while we sat in the sun and supped martinis’
Big pats on the back, even though they don’t pay the
bills
Well done and thanks
You won't find one until that work is complete. How it should work is
not how it currently works - it's a functioning work in progress.
--Bill
On 8/8/05, alan walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Just looking for a quick blah on how the incoming load balancer should
> work
---
PS. give it a week, should be solid and in it's final incarnation.
--Bill
On 8/8/05, Bill Marquette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You won't find one until that work is complete. How it should work is
> not how it currently works - it's a functioning work in progress.
>
> --Bill
>
> On 8/8/05, al
Thank us in a week when all the bugs are worked out.
Scott
On 8/8/05, alan walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Well just thought to say thanks to the fine work you all achieved in the
> weekend while we sat in the sun and supped martinis'
>
>
>
> Big pats on the back, even thou
On 8/8/05, Dimitri Rodis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> We are currently running monowall on Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 so far
> with no problems at all-- it runs great, and does the job we need it to.
>
that actually surprises me... I haven't tried running FreeBSD with
the VS SP1 beta
Believe me, I do like GSX better, but since we are an MS house, we
actually own copies of the stuff, and our entire operation (hosting as
well as internal production machines, 10 total) all runs on VS2005. I am
aware of the issue with the clock, as I am hosting a Linux VM for a
buddy, and his solut
28 matches
Mail list logo
