I hear you, but until there are valid TLDs for ".(number)-(number)"
perhaps that test could be edited? Or possibly print "WARNING: what you
entered was detected as a hostname but might have been intended as an IP block,
and if we can't resolve the hostname, rules will not pass traffic for any other
listed IPs in this alias" or similar?
Reading what I just wrote, what happens if a valid hostname ever can't
be resolved in the future? The rule stops working then also?
--
Steve Yates
ITS, Inc.
PiBa wrote on Mon, Apr 20 2015 at 12:27 pm:
> Problem is that what you typed validates as a valid 'hostname'..
>
> Steve Yates schreef op 20-4-2015 om 17:52:
>> I had a situation this weekend where I wanted to add another IP range to an
> existing alias. I entered x.x.x.75-99 which the eagle eyed among you will
> notice
> is invalid syntax (should be x.x.x.x75-x.x.x.99). pfSense 2.2.1 didn't
> complain
> about that when adding it or applying the rules, but traffic stopped and I
> finally
> found an error logged in the System/Resolver log of all places:
>>
>> filterdns: failed to resolve host x.x.x.75-99 will retry later again.
>>
>> There were no other errors logged that I can find. I would like to suggest
> pfSense validate alias input to catch that invalid entry format and make it a
> tad
> more idiot-proof. :)
_______________________________________________
pfSense mailing list
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
