On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 8:22 PM, Olivier Nicole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think (from what I tried/looked) that rdr to localhost is not
> compatible with bridging: bridge can only pass (or block) packets
> between the two interfaces that are bridged, it cannot redirect the
> packets to somew
> He still needs an IP on some interface for management (presumably
> LAN).
True. Well in fact its a thrid interface, that makes the rules easier
to manage.
> Any chance CP could be used on that interface? It's been so
> long since I've looked at CP, I don't remember what we're doing under
> t
> Besides that, if you want to make use of the public IPs, why not set up 1:1
> NAT mappings for all of your public IPs and then just set your DHCP pool on
> your LAN interface to use the corresponding private IPs? That way, you can
> "use" all your public IPs, and each client will have one-- I've
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 2:09 AM, Chris Buechler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Olivier Nicole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi Dimitri,
>>
>> Thanks for the clues, i will look at what i can do with the switch.
>>
>>> Is there a particular reason you are trying to do a
riginal Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris
Buechler
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 12:10 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Bridge + Captive Portal
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Olivier Nicole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> All valid, but a captive portal implementation by definition cannot be
> transparent. It has to redirect hosts to an IP on one of its
> interfaces to serve the portal content.
I once designed a prototype where the authentication interface was
located on the outside of the firewall; the firewall
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Olivier Nicole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Dimitri,
>
> Thanks for the clues, i will look at what i can do with the switch.
>
>> Is there a particular reason you are trying to do a captive portal using a
>> bridge setup vs NAT?
>
> We have the right amount of pu
Hi Dimitri,
Thanks for the clues, i will look at what i can do with the switch.
> Is there a particular reason you are trying to do a captive portal using a
> bridge setup vs NAT?
We have the right amount of public IP available (only a class C, but
for around 150 users, that's plenty enough), so
008 12:34 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Bridge + Captive Portal
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:15 PM, Olivier Nicole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry to bug, but the question is of some importance to me as I have
> to select and implement a solution.
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:15 PM, Olivier Nicole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry to bug, but the question is of some importance to me as I have
> to select and implement a solution.
>
> Is pfSense can use bridge and captive portal at the same time?
No, at least not that I'm aware of. It
Hi,
Sorry to bug, but the question is of some importance to me as I have
to select and implement a solution.
Is pfSense can use bridge and captive portal at the same time? How
many interfaces are needed/for what purpose?
1- IPless, inside firewall
2- IPless, outside firewall
3- inside firewall,
Hi,
Just top make sure, is it possible to use pfSense in bridge mode +
captive portal: before crossing the bridge the user must authenticate.
If so, how many interfaces are needed?
That is not completly impossible, I used to build a prototype with
NoCat, but it needed 4 interfaces (or the captiv
12 matches
Mail list logo
