Hi Louis, I rewrote the rules, and noticed one strange behaviour:
You are allowed to create multiple rules with the same name, but clicking those seems to always show one and the same rule. So perhaps check for an existing name, and disallow using it? Anyway: there seems to a remaining issue with the fingerbank. Many lines like: > Feb 09 11:11:24 pfqueue(19417) WARN: [mac:b8:6b:23:e4:75:14] Unable to > perform a Fingerbank lookup for device with MAC address 'b8:6b:23:e4:75:14' > (pf::fingerbank::process) > Feb 09 11:11:32 pfqueue(19417) WARN: [mac:b8:6b:23:e4:75:14] Unable to > perform a Fingerbank lookup for device with MAC address 'b8:6b:23:e4:75:14' > (pf::fingerbank::process) > Feb 09 11:11:32 pfqueue(19418) WARN: [mac:b8:6b:23:e4:75:14] Unable to > perform a Fingerbank lookup for device with MAC address 'b8:6b:23:e4:75:14' > (pf::fingerbank::process) Looking up the mac address from the gui, gives: > Error! Searching for 'MAC_Vendor' entries in schema(s) returned an empty set We upgraded packetfence from 5.3, so I guessed fingerbank still needed it's database update: > root@pf:/usr/local/fingerbank/db# ./upgrade.pl fingerbank_Local.db > DBIx::Class::Schema::connect(): Your DB is currently unversioned. Please call > upgrade on your schema to sync the DB. at ./upgrade.pl line 37 > touch: missing file operand > Try `touch --help' for more information. > DBIx::Class::Schema::Versioned::upgrade(): DB version (1.0) is lower than the > schema version (2.1). Attempting upgrade. > DBIx::Class::Schema::Versioned::upgrade(): DBI Exception: DBD::SQLite::db do > failed: no such table: combination [for Statement "ALTER TABLE "combination" > RENAME TO "combination_temp""] at ./upgrade.pl line 59 > root@pf:/usr/local/fingerbank/db# Soo...this is where I hope that the list has some interesting input? :-) By the way: DHCP is also running with near 100% cpu usage, and I'm guessing that's related to the fingerbank issue. MJ On 8-2-2016 21:20, Louis Munro wrote: > > >> On Feb 8, 2016, at 12:43 , mourik jan heupink <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> authentication rule class allowed actions > > > Hi Mourik, > I believe what you are looking for is documented in the UPGRADE.ascidoc > and was introduced in 5.4. > > Check the section "Authentication sources rules reworkâ and see if you > have any misclassified rules (authentication vs administration). > > If in doubt, post your authentication.conf file and let us know which > rules seem to be causing the error. > > Regards, > -- > Louis Munro > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> :: www.inverse.ca > <http://www.inverse.ca> > +1.514.447.4918 x125 :: +1 (866) 353-6153 x125 > Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (www.sogo.nu <http://www.sogo.nu>) > and PacketFence (www.packetfence.org <http://www.packetfence.org>) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance > APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month > Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now > Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140 > > > > _______________________________________________ > PacketFence-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ PacketFence-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users
