I'd recommend a hard drive or a CF card in an IDE/CF adapter.
The LiveCD isn't *really* for long term production use... More of a testing
thing.
-Original Message-
From: Dimitri Rodis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 7 June 2006 12:36 p.m.
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: RE: [
1 Mbit should be fine on the minimum spec box - a pentium with 128 Mb ram.
More is good of course.
-Original Message-
From: Jack Pivac [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 7 June 2006 1:25 p.m.
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic shaping / prioritisation
From: Jonathan Woodard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I wonder if there is some way in Pfsense to separate the 2
> (public/private) on the one AP? I am thinking not since I want to secure
> one and not the other but I would just like verification on this.
Not on the one wireless card - you would
pfSense is working great for me. I have a captive portal NIC in my
firewall, which wors fine. I want to connect some spare wireless APs to the
captive portal NIC.
The hangup is that I only have a limited number of fibres between buildings,
and they're all in use for a flat network. The main net
This is a guess - but maybe because both wireless cards are physically right
beside each other maybe their aerials are crosstalking.
Try moving the cards so they are in PCI slots as far apart as possible.
If that doesn't help try a replacement aerial on a cable rather than a
pencil aerial out t
And I have to wonder if "proactive" caching saves anything other than time.
I remember those "download accelerators" that would pre-download every link
on the current web page, but those were really only useful in a time-charged
situation.
The main difference between squid and Ryan's descriptio
Fair enough - can you put the recommended answer in the docs somewhere?
Automated backups > my memory.
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 29 June 2006 9:21 a.m.
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] automatic backup
FWIW,
give me some more info on
squid. I have never heard of this.
-Original Message-
From: Craig FALCONER [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 4:11 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Package Request - Cache Server ???
And I have to wonder if "pro
Title: Message
SNMP
causes those spikes afaik. Disable it if you don't need
it?
-Original Message-From: Tim Dickson
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 29 June 2006
10:28 a.m.To: support@pfsense.comSubject: RE: [pfSense
Support] States Locking UpOK, so it's be
et my states.If I leave it alone eventually it will
usually clear up, but it could take several minutes to an
hour.-TimOn Thu, 2006-06-29 at 10:49 +1200, Craig FALCONER wrote:
SNMP causes those
spikes afaik. Disable it if you don't need it?
---
Damn strange - I can ssh into a P166 running pfSense and it still works full
speed.
-Original Message-
From: Scott Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 30 June 2006 12:27 a.m.
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] PFSense + Poweredge
...Overkill Yes, but
From: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cvs_sync.sh releng_1
Note - doing this requires at *least* 100 Mb of free disk space, possibly
more.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:
One of the easiest answers is to download your config.xml file,
edit it in a text editor (or a spreadsheet programme)
and upload it again.
-Original Message-
From: Brad Bendy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 10 July 2006 8:57 p.m.
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Suppor
Its definitely there in RELENG_1_SNAPSHOT-06-24-2006 already, and probably
earlier versions too.
-Original Message-
From: Volker Kuhlmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 19 July 2006 1:46 p.m.
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Support] favicon
I would find it a good
Shouldn't be anything special - make sure SSH is turned on in the advanced
page, and give the machine time to generate ssh keys etc. (you'll get a
message at the top of your window when that is done)
Also confirm you're using the right port (22)
Check out the firewall logs page as well, just aft
I do it a little differently... There are machines I don't want proxied,
like the servers and my workstation.
So I tell pfSense to allow port 80 outbound from 192.168.0.0/23 and block it
for other ranges. Users get the proxy information entered by their windows
domain login script, and don't have
Why not call them 1.0-SNAPSHOT-2006-09-03? At least they'll sort correctly
in a listing. Or are we really talking about the 8th and 9th of march 2006?
It proves that pfSense is a global programme, when date representation
issues arise :)
-Original Message-
From: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[
Beg your pardon - SMP is enabled fine in pfSense
>From dmesg
FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs
cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0
cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 2
-Original Message-
From: Robert Carr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, 10 September 2006 7:48 a.m.
To: support@pfse
Another thought - maybe the firewall rules allow some crap to enter your
network from the WAN side, and someone else's windows box is spewing smb on
the local cable segment you're on?
-Original Message-
From: Holger Bauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 21 September 2006 11:52
No that's not enough... You need one of these:
http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q1/gigabyte-iram/index.x?pg=1
then create a swap file on that!
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 6 November 2006 5:01 p.m.
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re
Should work - I've been playing with vlans and got it all working.
The only weirdness I have left to solve is why my vlan only works if there's
a
tcpdump -i vlan0 > /dev/null &
running on my pfsense box. If thats not running I simply see no data.
-Original Message-
From: Nathan Osbor
From: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>On 11/8/06, Craig FALCONER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Should work - I've been playing with vlans and got it all working.
>>
>> The only weirdness I have left to solve is why my vlan only works if
>>
Title: Message
So you
have a two-way metrosexual connection?
-Original Message-From: Nathan Osborne
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 9 November 2006 9:39
a.m.To: support@pfsense.comSubject: Re: [pfSense
Support] VLAN trunking?It's a pretty short distance and
i
Heya - not wishing to argue, but I'm really telling the truth.
vlan0 is 192.168.200.1/24 and the workstation is at 192.168.200.2
# ping 192.168.200.2
PING 192.168.200.2 (192.168.200.2): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 192.168.200.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=4.221 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.200.2: icmp_se
ig vlan0 mtu 1496 promisc" ?
-Original Message-
From: Charles Sprickman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 9 November 2006 2:32 p.m.
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] VLAN trunking?
On Thu, 9 Nov 2006, Craig FALCONER wrote:
> Heya - not wishing to
I suspect this is not the answer. I ran tcpdump net 192.168.200.0/24 on a
third machine and there's no traffic detected. I'm using a dumb unmanaged
switch which makes it more confusing.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Buechler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 9 November 2006 3
stics ---
2 packets transmitted, 2 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.138/1.249/1.360/0.111 ms
#
So it looks like my VLAN setup required promisc mode on fxp0 (my lan port)
and vlan0
What do you think?
-Original Message-
From: Craig FALCONER [mailto:[
I'll have a stab - please correct me if I'm wrong...
Josep - I assume this is a snippet from the firewall logs page showing
traffic that has been blocked?
And that you have a webserver running on 192.168.101.2 with a valid NAT and
a firewall rule to allow traffic from * on WAN to port 80/tcp on y
of protection against a big number of connections from certains
IPs. However I did'nt find documentation about this.
Web server seems to be faster than before ...
You can look our web server at www.bellera.cat, if you want.
Best regards,
Josep Pujadas
-- Original Message
Mine's a 256 Mb card at home, which is fine. It will run on a 128 Mb card,
but its just a bit close sometimes.
Given prices these days, get a 256 Mb CF card. BTW don't bother getting a
fast one... The 66x and 133x don't anything for you, and can cause more
problems.
-Original Message
If you use squid - get a hard drive. Squid will accelerate the death of the
CF card from 5/10 years to probably less than one.
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Bennett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 1 December 2006 3:24 p.m.
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support]
ort@pfsense.com
Cc: Craig FALCONER
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Smallest drive for PFsense
On 12/1/06, Craig FALCONER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mine's a 256 Mb card at home, which is fine. It will run on a 128 Mb
> card, but its just a bit close sometimes.
>
> Give
Firewall - yes
Anti-spam - yes (you'll need the assp package)
Antivirus - no
Web filtering - kind of
I recommend a separate server machine inside your firewall that runs squid
and dansguardian on the unix of your choice. Also you can have a general
purpose file server with samba and a general pur
They're awesome wee boxes, and they run pfSense just fine. Especially given
it's a 1RU form factor. Mine's only a 166 MHz CPU and its fully useable.
-Original Message-
From: SDamron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 28 December 2006 2:49 p.m.
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [p
I don't have a suggestion - but do make sure your floppy image file is
formatted fat12 already - I had that problem with both pfsense and m0n0wall
inside vmware when I was testing.
-Original Message-
From: Anderson Carli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 29 December 2006 6:53 a.
Works fine for me - a 256 Mb CF card is relatively cheap, and when it does
die they'll be even cheaper.
I did a full install from CD by adding a CD drive temporarily to my machine.
Because you're using another machine, it may be detecting the wrong or a
weird disk geometry. Try using CHS rather
36 matches
Mail list logo
