[pfSense Support] Simply Query: Custom Definitions in pfSense?

2010-10-21 Thread James Bensley
Hello All :D Within pfSense (2.0 BETA4 here!) is it possible to define custom protocols for use with NAT and Firewall Rules. So, when adding a NAT rule for example there is a list of defined common service such as HTTP, SMTP, POP etc etc, can I add to this list? I seems silly if I have to edit

Re: [pfSense Support] Simply Query: Custom Definitions in pfSense?

2010-10-21 Thread Seth Mos
Op 21-10-2010 15:20, James Bensley schreef: Hello All :D You are looking for aliases. Seth - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial

Re: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 and SpamAssassin

2010-10-21 Thread James Bensley
If anyone comes across this on the archives, due to the lack of a compiler et all I found no way to achieve compiling SA on pfSense (probably could have compiled in on a FreeBSD box and moved everything over but that seems too arse-about-tit to me). I have virtualized pfSense on a CentOS box and

Re: [pfSense Support] Simply Query: Custom Definitions in pfSense?

2010-10-21 Thread James Bensley
On 21 October 2010 14:23, Seth Mos seth@dds.nl wrote: Op 21-10-2010 15:20, James Bensley schreef: Hello All :D You are looking for aliases. DAMN-IT!! What a buffoon, many thanks Seth for your prompt response. I knew it would be embarrassingly obvious :p -- Regards, James.

Re: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 and SpamAssassin

2010-10-21 Thread Paul Mansfield
On 21/10/10 14:23, James Bensley wrote: If anyone comes across this on the archives, due to the lack of a compiler et all I found no way to achieve compiling SA on pfSense pfsense is based on freebsd 7.2, get a copy here... ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/i386/7.2-RELEASE/ you

Re: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 and SpamAssassin

2010-10-21 Thread Paul Mansfield
argh, sorry, I didn't see the 2.0 bit... don't know which version it uses, but the same would apply, use pkg_add and if needed set the env var so it can find the package repository. but I would advise grabbing the appropriate version of freebsd and using that as a build platform rather than

Re: [pfSense Support] pfSense 2.0 and SpamAssassin

2010-10-21 Thread James Bensley
On 21 October 2010 15:07, Paul Mansfield it-admin-pfse...@taptu.com wrote: argh, sorry, I didn't see the 2.0 bit... don't know which version it uses, but the same would apply, use pkg_add and if needed set the env var so it can find the package repository. but I would advise grabbing the

[pfSense Support] Cannot achieve 100 mbps Full Duplex (C2D, Intel NICs)

2010-10-21 Thread Christian Borchert
I have a Dell Optiplex 745 SFFhttp://www.dell.com/downloads/global/products/optix/en/opti_745techspecs.pdf (Core 2 Duo) with an Intel PRO/1000 MT Dual Port Server Adapterhttp://www.intel.com/products/server/adapters/pro1000mt-dualport/pro1000mt-dualport-overview.htm I am running 2.0-BETA4 (i386)

Re: [pfSense Support] Cannot achieve 100 mbps Full Duplex (C2D, Intel NICs)

2010-10-21 Thread David Burgess
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Christian Borchert ccb...@gmail.com wrote: I have tried this network card in another machine (HP Core 2 Quad) and it works perfectly under the same test conditions. I have limited experience with Dell servers, but I have found some of their newer laptops

Re: [pfSense Support] Cannot achieve 100 mbps Full Duplex (C2D, Intel NICs)

2010-10-21 Thread Seth Mos
Hi, Op 21 okt 2010, om 20:06 heeft Christian Borchert het volgende geschreven: I have a Dell Optiplex 745 SFF (Core 2 Duo) with an Intel PRO/1000 MT Dual Port Server Adapter What might be happening here is the somewhat peculiar setup of the pci slot(s) on the Dell optiplex machines. For

Re: [pfSense Support] Cannot achieve 100 mbps Full Duplex (C2D, Intel NICs)

2010-10-21 Thread Christian Borchert
I have upgraded the BIOS to the latest (2.6.4 iirc) and that has not resolved the issue. I have tried with the onboard broadcom nic and a single intel pci gigabit nic, and also a single intel pcie nic. No change in throughput. On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Seth Mos seth@dds.nl wrote: