Re: Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread Scott Ullrich
Okay thats the correct file but it should only assign ESP if it see's the word ESP in the line. I didn't see "ESP" anywhere in that line that you showed so I am at a loss. On 12/26/05, David Strout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > # find / -name diag_logs_filter.php > /usr/local/www/diag_logs_filter.

Re: Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread David Strout
# find / -name diag_logs_filter.php /usr/local/www/diag_logs_filter.php # head /usr/local/www/diag_logs_filter.php #!/usr/local/bin/php http://m0n0.ch/wall) Copyright (C) 2003-2004 Manuel Kasper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. All rights reserved. # - Original Message - > Ahh, wrong

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread David Strout
Downloaded this morning from system42 ... how can I check the ISO version? -- David L. Strout Engineering Systems Plus, LLC - Original Message - Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: support@pfsense.com Date

Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread Scott Ullrich
Ahh, wrong file. diag_logs_filter.php What's the version on this file. On 12/26/05, David Strout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > # head /usr/local/www/diag_logs.php > #!/usr/local/bin/php > /* $Id: diag_logs.php,v 1.32.2.2 2005/12/21 > 22:12:39 sullrich Exp $ */ > /* > diag_logs.php > > >

Re: Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread Scott Ullrich
gt; including the re-pertition, formatting and all ... > I don't see how it could have retained one file. > > -- > David L. Strout > Engineering Systems Plus, LLC > > ----- Original Message - > Subject: Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error > reporting prot

Re: Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread David Strout
I see in the CVS web that the below referenced ver is the top ver. There is a newer version (1.34) but the time stamp is a few seconds older that the top level one. -- David L. Strout Engineering Systems Plus, LLC - Original Message - Subject: Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error

Re: Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread David Strout
e: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: support@pfsense.com Date: 12-26-2005 1:55 pm > You're version is grossly out of date. > > Please reinstall from the iso. > > On 12/26/05, David Strout <[EMAIL PROTEC

Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread Scott Ullrich
You're version is grossly out of date. Please reinstall from the iso. On 12/26/05, David Strout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > # head /usr/local/www/diag_logs.php > #!/usr/local/bin/php > /* $Id: diag_logs.php,v 1.32.2.2 2005/12/21 > 22:12:39 sullrich Exp $ */ > /* > diag_logs.php > > > >

Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread David Strout
# head /usr/local/www/diag_logs.php #!/usr/local/bin/php Actually, I don't see why this would be happening. > > What version does diag_logs.php show at the top for it's id? > > /* $Id: blah blah */ > > On 12/26/05, Scott Ullrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Are you sure these are the matching

Re: Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread David Strout
Yes, the only difference is that I checked "show raw logs" on the setting page. > Are you sure these are the matching records? I see differences. > > On 12/26/05, David Strout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Here is the enhanced log: > > > > Dec 26 13:37:39 WAN 24.39.130.241.3129 > > 24.

Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread Scott Ullrich
Actually, I don't see why this would be happening. What version does diag_logs.php show at the top for it's id? /* $Id: blah blah */ On 12/26/05, Scott Ullrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are you sure these are the matching records? I see differences. > > On 12/26/05, David Strout <[EMAIL PROT

Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread Scott Ullrich
Are you sure these are the matching records? I see differences. On 12/26/05, David Strout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here is the enhanced log: > > Dec 26 13:37:39 WAN 24.39.130.241.3129 > 24.39.185.78.445 ESP > Dec 26 13:37:36 WAN 24.39.130.241.3129 > 24.39.185.78.445 ESP > Dec

Re: Re: [pfSense Support] BETA1 error reporting protocal in firewall logs

2005-12-26 Thread David Strout
Here is the enhanced log: Dec 26 13:37:39 WAN 24.39.130.241.3129 24.39.185.78.445 ESP Dec 26 13:37:36 WAN 24.39.130.241.3129 24.39.185.78.445 ESP Dec 26 13:35:38 WAN 66.101.95.241:16246 24.39.185.78:1026 UDP And here is the raw log: Dec 26 13:37:39 pf: 2. 955773 rule 35/0(match):