Re: [pfSense-discussion] Sorry guys
Am 06.03.2008 um 23:30 schrieb Chris Buechler: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gentlemen! I sorry to have started this Return Receipt storm. Chris Buechler complained to me in private and asked me to turn off RR when writing to this forum which I will of course do my outmost to remember in the future. I half expected a "read receipt" pop up when I clicked on this message. ;) Thanks. If someone wants to tell me how to strip that off messages with ezmlm, I'll gladly do it, but I don't have time or care enough to look into how. http://www.ezmlm.org/faq/FAQ-9.html See 9.5 Disclaimer: I don't run a mailinglist with ezmlm, I only tinkered with it briefly. Or do you use qmailadmin? cheers, Rainer PS: I searched on google with "ezmlm strip headers"... -- Rainer Duffner CISSP, LPI, MCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [pfSense-discussion] Sorry guys
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gentlemen! I sorry to have started this Return Receipt storm. Chris Buechler complained to me in private and asked me to turn off RR when writing to this forum which I will of course do my outmost to remember in the future. I half expected a "read receipt" pop up when I clicked on this message. ;) Thanks. If someone wants to tell me how to strip that off messages with ezmlm, I'll gladly do it, but I don't have time or care enough to look into how.
[pfSense-discussion] Sorry guys
Gentlemen! I sorry to have started this Return Receipt storm. Chris Buechler complained to me in private and asked me to turn off RR when writing to this forum which I will of course do my outmost to remember in the future. Problem is that I prefer having RR on as default when doing normal mail and I didn't foresee the kaos this would lead to when writing pfSense. I have joined many other mailing lists where this is not a problem - I guess they strip the RR-header on incoming mails. Thanks (and sorry) Claus PGP http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=0xBE727C09&op=get&exact=on
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
> The real problem is that the %^$%^#$& mail program I am using does not allow > you to turn of return receipts. Corporate standards for the win! I feel for you, as your situation is very similar to what initially drove me to use my own address versus a corporate one. > Anyhow, it's fixed now.You can go on complaining about something else... But that's not how the intarweb works, we've always got to have something to complain about!
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
The real problem is that the %^$%^#$& mail program I am using does not allow you to turn of return receipts. Anyhow, it's fixed now.You can go on complaining about something else... Ryan Neily |> | From: | |> >--| |Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | >--| |> | To:| |> >--| |discussion@pfsense.com | >--| |> | Date: | |> >--| |03/06/2008 10:07 AM | >--| |> | Subject: | |> >--| |Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service | >--| On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 02:53:19PM +, Paul M wrote: > RB wrote: > > Bwa ha ha! Delicious, delicious irony! I knew it was inevitable > > since Ryan had to read the thread at least once more before fixing > > things, but it was worth it to see this one come in. > > has he fixed things? Just forward his spam to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] with full headers. If anyone on this list would start doing it, maybe his admins would wise up, and LART him. > > > > > On 3/6/08, Ryan Neily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Return Receipt > >> > >> Your document: RE: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service > >> > >> was received by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> at: 03/06/2008 09:22:47 EST -- Eugen* Leitl http://leitl.org";>leitl http://leitl.org __ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE <><>
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 02:53:19PM +, Paul M wrote: >> RB wrote: >>> Bwa ha ha! Delicious, delicious irony! I knew it was inevitable >>> since Ryan had to read the thread at least once more before fixing >>> things, but it was worth it to see this one come in. >> has he fixed things? > > Just forward his spam to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with full headers. > > If anyone on this list would start doing it, maybe his admins > would wise up, and LART him. shame SLTP never made it to a proper RFC http://buffy.sighup.org.uk/hfiles/aeds.html
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 02:53:19PM +, Paul M wrote: > RB wrote: > > Bwa ha ha! Delicious, delicious irony! I knew it was inevitable > > since Ryan had to read the thread at least once more before fixing > > things, but it was worth it to see this one come in. > > has he fixed things? Just forward his spam to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] with full headers. If anyone on this list would start doing it, maybe his admins would wise up, and LART him. > > > > > On 3/6/08, Ryan Neily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Return Receipt > >> > >> Your document: RE: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service > >> > >> was received by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> at: 03/06/2008 09:22:47 EST -- Eugen* Leitl http://leitl.org";>leitl http://leitl.org __ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
Sorry guys. I have unsubscribed. Hopefully this will fix things.. Ryan Neily |> | From: | |> >--| |Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | >--| |> | To:| |> >--| |discussion@pfsense.com | >--| |> | Date: | |> >--| |03/06/2008 09:47 AM | >--| |> | Subject: | |> >--| |Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service | >--| On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 01:32:11PM +, Paul M wrote: > I too have asked him privately. I suspect he's using Lotus Notes or > something equally horrible which cannot be configured sanely! That's what God invented webmail for. > Can the list admin get the mail system changed to strip the recipient > request headers out? The correct course of action is to boot him off on first offense. -- Eugen* Leitl http://leitl.org";>leitl http://leitl.org __ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE <><>
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
Return Receipt Your Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service document: was[EMAIL PROTECTED] received by: at:03/06/2008 09:59:47 EST
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
RB wrote: > Bwa ha ha! Delicious, delicious irony! I knew it was inevitable > since Ryan had to read the thread at least once more before fixing > things, but it was worth it to see this one come in. has he fixed things? > > On 3/6/08, Ryan Neily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Return Receipt >> >> Your document: RE: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service >> >> was received by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> at: 03/06/2008 09:22:47 EST
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
Bwa ha ha! Delicious, delicious irony! I knew it was inevitable since Ryan had to read the thread at least once more before fixing things, but it was worth it to see this one come in. On 3/6/08, Ryan Neily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Return Receipt > > Your document: RE: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service > > was received by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > at: 03/06/2008 09:22:47 EST
RE: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
Return Receipt Your RE: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service document: was[EMAIL PROTECTED] received by: at:03/06/2008 09:22:47 EST
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
> The correct course of action is to boot him off on first offense. This makes seven on my count
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 01:32:11PM +, Paul M wrote: > I too have asked him privately. I suspect he's using Lotus Notes or > something equally horrible which cannot be configured sanely! That's what God invented webmail for. > Can the list admin get the mail system changed to strip the recipient > request headers out? The correct course of action is to boot him off on first offense. -- Eugen* Leitl http://leitl.org";>leitl http://leitl.org __ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
Re: [pfSense-discussion] system for a good traffic shaping
> is that system good or not , any idea ? That should work, depending on your requirements, but do note that this only provides for failover on the circuits; should either of your pfSense systems fail, the entire network will go offline. Not having done multi-wan, I don't know how pfSense does hashing on the circuit election, but if it doesn't take external destination into account you'll never use one of your circuits. That said, I'm sure the devs did the Right Thing with this as they have with so many other things - can anyone confirm? I do have one question: what are the routers between the external system and the intarweb, and are they necessary? Depending on what their capabilities are, I could see using them in a different arrangement to provide a more HA solution. RB
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
RB wrote: > No, really - I asked you once in private, now I ask you again in I too have asked him privately. I suspect he's using Lotus Notes or something equally horrible which cannot be configured sanely! Can the list admin get the mail system changed to strip the recipient request headers out? > public: please turn off your foolish Outlook receipts. It is > ridiculous that we have to wade through your mail client's automated > spew that just tells us you received/read a given message. Most of us > really don't care (or actively dislike it), and you clutter stuff up > by not being a good list citizen. > > On 3/5/08, Ryan Neily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Return Receipt >> >> Your document: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service >>
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
No, really - I asked you once in private, now I ask you again in public: please turn off your foolish Outlook receipts. It is ridiculous that we have to wade through your mail client's automated spew that just tells us you received/read a given message. Most of us really don't care (or actively dislike it), and you clutter stuff up by not being a good list citizen. On 3/5/08, Ryan Neily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Return Receipt > > Your document: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service > > was received by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > at: 03/06/2008 01:00:01 EST
Re: [pfSense-discussion] Rules Default
Thanks =) it's a question levanted by staff here =) 2008/3/6, Paul M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Jose Augusto wrote: > > Hi, > > How pfsense work, begin with all ports closed? And then i open the > > necessary ports? > > > by default closed. > > however, whatever rule set you choose to implement it, you should > a/ understand how to test it > b/ test it regularly > > any security product, no matter how good, which is badly configured is > useless! > -- -- "Segurança da Informação se faz com tecnologia, processos e pessoas, e a formação destas exige mais que uma seqüência de treinamentos. Porque você treina macacos. Pessoas,você educa." FreeBSD: The Freedom to Perform! http://www.spreadbsd.org/aff/40/1
Re: [pfSense-discussion] Rules Default
Jose Augusto wrote: > Hi, > How pfsense work, begin with all ports closed? And then i open the > necessary ports? by default closed. however, whatever rule set you choose to implement it, you should a/ understand how to test it b/ test it regularly any security product, no matter how good, which is badly configured is useless!
[pfSense-discussion] Rules Default
Hi, How pfsense work, begin with all ports closed? And then i open the necessary ports? Thanks -- -- "Segurança da Informação se faz com tecnologia, processos e pessoas, e a formação destas exige mais que uma seqüência de treinamentos. Porque você treina macacos. Pessoas,você educa." FreeBSD: The Freedom to Perform! http://www.spreadbsd.org/aff/40/1
[pfSense-discussion] TCP Flags
How PfSense work with TCP Flags? It's possible? Thanks -- -- "Segurança da Informação se faz com tecnologia, processos e pessoas, e a formação destas exige mais que uma seqüência de treinamentos. Porque você treina macacos. Pessoas,você educa." FreeBSD: The Freedom to Perform! http://www.spreadbsd.org/aff/40/1
[pfSense-discussion] system for a good traffic shaping
hello all i have 1 lan and2 wan , because the traffic shaping is not work in multiple wans in 1.2 released , i want to configure this system i setup 1 pfsense for load balancing and fail over and second pfsense for traffic shaping and squid cashe. is that system good or not , any idea ? is working good traffic shaping here ? thanks *.*<>
Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are! But only the default 0.pfsense.pool.ntp.org server is specified. What I see is that my pfSense talks to a number of different time servers and many of those looks like ordinary ADSL subscribers which scares me a little. That's the whole point http://www.pool.ntp.org/ Common for all time servers seen is that they geographical are close to where I live which made me believe that there was some kind of self configuration going on - maybe based on the timezone entered ? http://www.pool.ntp.org/use.html will explain further. Greg I poked around in the command line looking for *ntp* files but that didn't reveal anything. Claus |-Original Message- |From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] |Posted At: Thursday, March 06, 2008 1:55 AM |Posted To: pfSense |Conversation: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service |Subject: Re: [pfSense-discussion] pfSense / Time Service | | |On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 5:00 PM, jason whitt |<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: |> i may be wrong here however i thought there was a default |time server sync |> setup in the config? | |There is. Look in System->General. Bottom of the page I believe. | |--Bill |
