Re: [pfSense] pfSense Routing - VPN's

[Karl Fife]

This is exactly what we do.

We make the hub the OpenVPN server, and the spokes the clients because 
the hub IP is static, and we can manage all of the OpenVPN listeners on 
one instance.


If your whole network is a /16, and each spoke is a /24, all you need is 
a route directive on each of the spokes for the entire /16. In OpenVPN 
Advanced "route 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0;"


You don't need any routing directives on the 'hub' because the addition 
of each connection will take care of that.


With respect to rules:
We find it best to make the first rule on the hub's OpenVPN interface this:
"Any source/port NOT destined for THIS hub subnet is allowed to pass".  
That way each branch can manage their ingress policy privately because 
the hub will just route anything not destined for its subnet.


We also find it best to set up DNS forwarders to the spoke networks, 
i.e. Hub: mybranch.mycompany.com dns dips are at 192.168.11.1. Spokes 
can dip the hub if so configured which can in turn dip OTHER spokes if 
so configured.  Inverse lookups work too.  For example, add a dns 
forwarder of 10.168.192.in-addr.arpa to allow inverse lookups in the 
spoke in the subnet 192.168.10.0/24


It's been rock-solid for many years now!

Good luck.





On 5/16/2014 1:16 AM, A Mohan Rao wrote:

its very simple...!
first u have to configure a main vpn site to site vpn server at your 
main branch then u can easily configure a b c etc.

with share key and tunnel network.


On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Alex Threlfall > wrote:


Hi All,

I currently have a number of sites which have
VPN's between them, with each site having a VPN to one another.
This is becoming harder to manage, we currently have 5 sites, (6
if you include my home) and it would make sense to me to adopt
more of a star architecture with a central site.

However, I can't work out how to configure this!
Each site has it's own /24 of private address, and I have a
central branch. How can I configure things so that the if branch B
needs to get to branch C, it knows that it must go via branch A?

Branch A has the best connectivity -- bonded
FTTC's, so would make sense as well as it being our "hub" branch
for the stock control system also.

Any advice would be appreciated!

--

Alex Threlfall

Cyberprog New Media

www.cyberprog.net 


___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org 
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list




___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list


___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] pfSense Routing - VPN's

[A Mohan Rao]

its very simple...!
first u have to configure a main vpn site to site vpn server at your main
branch then u can easily configure a b c etc.
with share key and tunnel network.


On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 2:53 AM, Alex Threlfall  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
>
>
> I currently have a number of sites which have VPN’s
> between them, with each site having a VPN to one another. This is becoming
> harder to manage, we currently have 5 sites, (6 if you include my home) and
> it would make sense to me to adopt more of a star architecture with a
> central site.
>
>
>
> However, I can’t work out how to configure this! Each site
> has it’s own /24 of private address, and I have a central branch. How can I
> configure things so that the if branch B needs to get to branch C, it knows
> that it must go via branch A?
>
>
>
> Branch A has the best connectivity – bonded FTTC’s, so
> would make sense as well as it being our “hub” branch for the stock control
> system also.
>
>
>
> Any advice would be appreciated!
>
>
>
> --
>
> Alex Threlfall
>
> Cyberprog New Media
>
> www.cyberprog.net
>
>
>
> ___
> List mailing list
> List@lists.pfsense.org
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] pfSense Routing - VPN's

[David Miller]

Look into using a dynamic routing protocol like OSPF to have each network
learn the routes to the other networks.  Then set the path cost through
branch A to be the lowest cost route.

--
David


On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Alex Threlfall  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
>
>
> I currently have a number of sites which have VPN’s
> between them, with each site having a VPN to one another. This is becoming
> harder to manage, we currently have 5 sites, (6 if you include my home) and
> it would make sense to me to adopt more of a star architecture with a
> central site.
>
>
>
> However, I can’t work out how to configure this! Each site
> has it’s own /24 of private address, and I have a central branch. How can I
> configure things so that the if branch B needs to get to branch C, it knows
> that it must go via branch A?
>
>
>
> Branch A has the best connectivity – bonded FTTC’s, so
> would make sense as well as it being our “hub” branch for the stock control
> system also.
>
>
>
> Any advice would be appreciated!
>
>
>
> --
>
> Alex Threlfall
>
> Cyberprog New Media
>
> www.cyberprog.net
>
>
>
> ___
> List mailing list
> List@lists.pfsense.org
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

[pfSense] Gateway on a gateway...

[faisal.gill...@akesp.org]

II have two networks connected together with an MPLS network all the clients on 
both networks can access each other.
Site 1( 172.16.0.0/21) has a packet filtering multi WAN firewall (172.16.1.16) 
on its local subnet which local clients connect to use internet.
Site 2  (172.16.11.0/24) clients connects to local router (172.16.11.17) which 
routes all site 1 destend traffic to site 1 router (172.16.0.17). all site 2 
clients have the ip of site 2 router which is (172.16.11.17) in their default 
gateway.Now i want clients on site 2 to use my packet filtering firewall 
(172.16.1.16) for their internet needs so how do i define this which out 
breaking the already communication
can anyone guide me in this ? 

Sent from my HTC

___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] pfSense Routing - VPN's

[Oliver Hansen]

If possible, using OpenVPN for this is the easiest to configure IMO. You
can just push the routes in your VPN configuration.

I believe the wiki has good instructions for this.
On May 15, 2014 2:22 PM, "Alex Threlfall"  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
>
>
> I currently have a number of sites which have VPN’s
> between them, with each site having a VPN to one another. This is becoming
> harder to manage, we currently have 5 sites, (6 if you include my home) and
> it would make sense to me to adopt more of a star architecture with a
> central site.
>
>
>
> However, I can’t work out how to configure this! Each site
> has it’s own /24 of private address, and I have a central branch. How can I
> configure things so that the if branch B needs to get to branch C, it knows
> that it must go via branch A?
>
>
>
> Branch A has the best connectivity – bonded FTTC’s, so
> would make sense as well as it being our “hub” branch for the stock control
> system also.
>
>
>
> Any advice would be appreciated!
>
>
>
> --
>
> Alex Threlfall
>
> Cyberprog New Media
>
> www.cyberprog.net
>
>
>
> ___
> List mailing list
> List@lists.pfsense.org
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] Status of pfSense 2.2 regarding 802.11n

[Victor Padro]

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Matthias May  wrote:

> Am 15.05.2014 20:49, schrieb Jim Pingle:
>
>  On 5/15/2014 1:03 PM, b...@todoo.biz wrote:
>>
>>> I wanted to know what was the status of 2.2 regarding WLAN (802.11 n)
>>> support / implementation ?
>>>
>>> I am mainly interested in Atheros driver support since most of our HW is
>>> based on this chipset.
>>>
>> The drivers are there, and the GUI options should pick up on the
>> supported protocols automatically.
>>
>> I don't have an 802.11n capable card in anything running pfSense at the
>> moment to try it, but it should be there.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>> ___
>> List mailing list
>> List@lists.pfsense.org
>> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>>
> I'm using 2.2 with some atheros based cards.
> Works pretty well.
> One thing i'm missing is the ability to configure the specific n features.
> e.g. the GUI settings for the antenna are specifically for non-n cards.
> Not sure what these settings will actually do (i guess nothing).
> By default just everything you usually want is enabled.
>
> Matthias
>
> ___
> List mailing list
> List@lists.pfsense.org
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>

Will it be able to support 300 Mbps?
I have an atheros card which only supports 54-150Mbps so far.

-- 
"Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding
of ourselves"
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

[pfSense] pfSense Routing - VPN's

[Alex Threlfall]

Hi All,

 

I currently have a number of sites which have VPN's between
them, with each site having a VPN to one another. This is becoming harder to
manage, we currently have 5 sites, (6 if you include my home) and it would
make sense to me to adopt more of a star architecture with a central site.

 

However, I can't work out how to configure this! Each site
has it's own /24 of private address, and I have a central branch. How can I
configure things so that the if branch B needs to get to branch C, it knows
that it must go via branch A?

 

Branch A has the best connectivity - bonded FTTC's, so would
make sense as well as it being our "hub" branch for the stock control system
also.

 

Any advice would be appreciated!

 

--

Alex Threlfall

Cyberprog New Media

www.cyberprog.net

 

___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] Status of pfSense 2.2 regarding 802.11n

[Matthias May]

Am 15.05.2014 20:49, schrieb Jim Pingle:

On 5/15/2014 1:03 PM, b...@todoo.biz wrote:

I wanted to know what was the status of 2.2 regarding WLAN (802.11 n) support / 
implementation ?

I am mainly interested in Atheros driver support since most of our HW is based 
on this chipset.

The drivers are there, and the GUI options should pick up on the
supported protocols automatically.

I don't have an 802.11n capable card in anything running pfSense at the
moment to try it, but it should be there.

Jim

___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

I'm using 2.2 with some atheros based cards.
Works pretty well.
One thing i'm missing is the ability to configure the specific n features.
e.g. the GUI settings for the antenna are specifically for non-n cards.
Not sure what these settings will actually do (i guess nothing).
By default just everything you usually want is enabled.

Matthias
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] Status of pfSense 2.2 regarding 802.11n

[Jim Pingle]

On 5/15/2014 1:03 PM, b...@todoo.biz wrote:
> I wanted to know what was the status of 2.2 regarding WLAN (802.11 n) support 
> / implementation ? 
> 
> I am mainly interested in Atheros driver support since most of our HW is 
> based on this chipset. 

The drivers are there, and the GUI options should pick up on the
supported protocols automatically.

I don't have an 802.11n capable card in anything running pfSense at the
moment to try it, but it should be there.

Jim

___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] pfsense 2.1.3 and IPv6 problem

[Chris L]

On May 15, 2014, at 7:15 AM, R. Svejda  wrote:

> 
> On 14/05/14 17:55, Chris L wrote:
>> On May 14, 2014, at 2:51 AM, R. Svejda  wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Chris
>>> 
>>> generally full agreement with your suggestion, but that's not my problem. 
>>> Same IPv6 setup works well with the very same computer in 2nd network 
>>> environment, only difference is only the WAN link on the 2nd pfsense.
>>> 
>>> In my case, I assume that:
>>> - client sends to IPv6 gateway on link-lokal address
>>> - link lokal address is used by multiple devices
>>> - default route for IPv6 is HE tunnel (through gif0 interface)
>>> - But: pppoe2 interface (in very same link-local address!) has an own IPv6 
>>> gateway which is not working ..
>>> 
>>> I am not a network pro and above thoughts might be wrong, but that's how I 
>>> see it now ...
>>> 
>>> PS1: Most "problematic" (reliably failing) page in bad IPv6 setup is 
>>> "de.wikipedia.org" (never checked if en.wikipedia.org has the same problem)
>>> PS2: Ubuntu "apt-get update && upgrade" fail as well! it's not only web 
>>> access.
>>> 
>> 
> 
> Hi Chris
> thats the wrong path. Same client is working perfectly in Main Office. No 
> difference except for the WAN interface (pppoe at home office; static with 
> another upstream firewall at main office).
> 
> 1)
> Why is pppoe interface getting an IPv6 gateway assigned - in pfsense 
> settings, IPv6 is marked as NONE on WAN interface!

That’s a good question.  I assume you’ve reset the interface/restarted pfSense 
since disabling IPv6 on pppoe2.  I don’t have a PPPoE service to test with.  
It’s coming from somewhere. Check the logs when the interface resets/reboots.

> 
> 2)
> Why do the interfaces vr0, ppoe2, gif0 and vr1_vlan11 all have the same 
> link-local address? Specially vr1_vlan11 has the same link-local address like 
> the device vr0 while vr1 has a different one!

I don’t think that’s your problem.

http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/developers-handbook/ipv6.html

"Interfaces that has no IEEE802 address (pseudo interfaces like tunnel 
interfaces, or ppp interfaces) will borrow IEEE802 address from other 
interfaces, such as Ethernet interfaces, whenever possible. If there is no 
IEEE802 hardware attached, a last resort pseudo-random value, MD5(hostname), 
will be used as source of link-local address. If it is not suitable for your 
usage, you will need to configure the link-local address manually.”

Though it does seem like vr1_vlan11 should use vr1’s MAC address to generate 
its link-local, I don’t think it’s causing your problems and is probably 
harmless - perhaps intended.

> 
> IPv4 connection is on  pppoe2 / vr1_vlan
> IPv6 connection is on gif0
> LAN is vr0
> 
> Anybody a hint? How can I disable or remove IPv6 config from pppoe/WAN?
> 
> Radim
> 
> 
> 
>  old stuff, wrong order, sorry:
>> 
>>> regards, Radim
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 14/05/14 10:06, Chris L wrote:
 Instead of generic, local ifconfig information, it might be more 
 beneficial to concentrate on a specific site that isn’t working and work 
 back from there.
 
 If you fix one, you might just fix them all.
 
 In dual-stack, I have found that the problem is usually receiving a good 
  record when querying DNS but not having a good v6 route.  Your 
 browser does the right thing, trying v6 first, gets a good DNS response, 
 but can’t get there.
 
 This is what I experience when my IP address changes.  It doesn’t happen 
 often, maybe every eight months or so, but it trashes my HE tunnel until I 
 get it reconfigured.  This is because IPv4 nameservers can give good  
 answers. But then there’s no IPv6 route.  The IPv4 nameserver has no idea 
 whether you have a good IPv6 route. It receives an  resolution request 
 and dutifully obliges.
 
 My client computers have no idea the HE tunnel is dead.  They ask if 
 there’s an IPv6 router on the segment, get a response, and think 
 everything is hunky-dory so they ask for  records first.  They get a 
 good response, and try to connect.  But the Internetv6 is down.  :(
 
 On May 14, 2014, at 12:47 AM, R.Sv.  wrote:
 
> Dear all
> 
> Started to play around with IPv6 with my Swiss provider (VTX, not yet 
> officially supporting IPv6) and HE.net IPv6 Tunnel.
> 
> IPv6 works, but not correctly, some web pages do not load at all or never 
> end to finish loading. I guess because some routing problem. Looking at 
> "ifconfig" I have 2 questions:
> 
> 1) Why do vr0, vr1_vlan, pppoe2 and gif0 interfaces have the same 
> link-local address?
> 2) Why does ppoe2 have a an official IPv6 address (in 
> GUI/Status/Interfaces it displays as Gateway IPv6)
> 
> On the box, IPv6 is on
> On WAN interface: IPv4 Config Type: PPPoE; IPv6 Config Type: None
> 
> With Config-Type=None I would 

[pfSense] Status of pfSense 2.2 regarding 802.11n

[b...@todoo.biz]

Hi, 

I wanted to know what was the status of 2.2 regarding WLAN (802.11 n) support / 
implementation ? 

I am mainly interested in Atheros driver support since most of our HW is based 
on this chipset. 


Thanks for your update. 


«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§

Your provider of OpenSource Appliances

www.osnet.eu

«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§

PGP ID --> 0x1BA3C2FD

___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] Annoying Comcast Issue When Changing Hardware

[Aaron C. de Bruyn]

Interesting.  Thanks Chris.

-A


On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 6:19 AM, Chris Buechler  wrote:

> On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Aaron C. de Bruyn 
> wrote:
> >
> > Slightly OT, but why would they have ARP cache timeouts of four hours?
>  What
> > benefit do you get with such high cache times as opposed to the obvious
> > support calls you will get when equipment is swapped around?
> >
>
> That's Cisco's default and others aren't too far from that generally.
> I believe that's something that hasn't changed since originally
> implemented decades ago. Originally, it was likely because networks
> were slow and not switched, so you didn't want to chew up a lot of
> bandwidth just handling ARP. As with many cases along those lines, it
> got entrenched and once a vendor sets a specific default, they tend to
> not want to change it. That's largely educated guessing, as I'm not
> completely sure the reasoning, just that it's been like that more or
> less forever.
>
> Yes, with modern networks, in a lot of cases it's really not sensible
> to hang onto your ARP cache for hours.
>
> A number of cable modems are worse than 4 hours. I can think of a
> handful of times over the last 7 years or so, with the most recent
> being a couple months ago, where a support customer got in touch with
> us after trying to move some IPs and messing with it for multiple days
> and couldn't make it work. Packet capture on WAN for the affected IPs,
> check the destination MAC, see something other than the firewall. Ask
> "What's this X MAC?" "The old box we unplugged last week." Power cycle
> cable modem, all is well.
> ___
> List mailing list
> List@lists.pfsense.org
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] pfsense 2.1.3 and IPv6 problem

[R. Svejda]

On 14/05/14 17:55, Chris L wrote:

On May 14, 2014, at 2:51 AM, R. Svejda  wrote:


Hi Chris

generally full agreement with your suggestion, but that's not my problem. Same 
IPv6 setup works well with the very same computer in 2nd network environment, 
only difference is only the WAN link on the 2nd pfsense.

In my case, I assume that:
- client sends to IPv6 gateway on link-lokal address
- link lokal address is used by multiple devices
- default route for IPv6 is HE tunnel (through gif0 interface)
- But: pppoe2 interface (in very same link-local address!) has an own IPv6 
gateway which is not working ..

I am not a network pro and above thoughts might be wrong, but that's how I see 
it now ...

PS1: Most "problematic" (reliably failing) page in bad IPv6 setup is 
"de.wikipedia.org" (never checked if en.wikipedia.org has the same problem)
PS2: Ubuntu "apt-get update && upgrade" fail as well! it's not only web access.


OK.  So get on the client machine that’s failing and work from there.  dig, dig 
-6, ping, ping6, etc. Web browser can connect to v6 using [v6address], etc.

$ dig de.wikipedia.org a

; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> de.wikipedia.org
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 13968
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 3, ADDITIONAL: 3

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;de.wikipedia.org.  IN  A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
de.wikipedia.org.   3070IN  CNAME   wikipedia-lb.wikimedia.org.
wikipedia-lb.wikimedia.org. 17  IN  CNAME   text-lb.ulsfo.wikimedia.org.
text-lb.ulsfo.wikimedia.org. 641 IN A   198.35.26.96

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
wikimedia.org.  31413   IN  NS  ns0.wikimedia.org.
wikimedia.org.  31413   IN  NS  ns1.wikimedia.org.
wikimedia.org.  31413   IN  NS  ns2.wikimedia.org.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
ns2.wikimedia.org.  976 IN  A   91.198.174.239
ns0.wikimedia.org.  1219IN  A   208.80.154.238
ns1.wikimedia.org.  976 IN  A   208.80.152.214

;; Query time: 26 msec
;; SERVER: 192.168.223.1#53(192.168.223.1)
;; WHEN: Wed May 14 08:39:49 2014
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 217

$ dig -6 de.wikipedia.org a

; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> -6 de.wikipedia.org
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 34558
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;de.wikipedia.org.  IN  A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
de.wikipedia.org.   3063IN  CNAME   wikipedia-lb.wikimedia.org.
wikipedia-lb.wikimedia.org. 10  IN  CNAME   text-lb.ulsfo.wikimedia.org.
text-lb.ulsfo.wikimedia.org. 634 IN A   198.35.26.96

;; Query time: 1 msec
;; SERVER: 2001:470:f00e:223::1#53(2001:470:f00e:223::1)
;; WHEN: Wed May 14 08:39:57 2014
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 131

$ dig de.wikipedia.org 

; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> de.wikipedia.org 
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 29135
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;de.wikipedia.org.  IN  

;; ANSWER SECTION:
de.wikipedia.org.   68  IN  CNAME   wikipedia-lb.wikimedia.org.
wikipedia-lb.wikimedia.org. 401 IN  CNAME   text-lb.ulsfo.wikimedia.org.
text-lb.ulsfo.wikimedia.org. 3401 IN2620:0:863:ed1a::1

;; Query time: 45 msec
;; SERVER: 192.168.223.1#53(192.168.223.1)
;; WHEN: Wed May 14 08:40:10 2014
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 127

$ dig -6 de.wikipedia.org 

; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> -6 de.wikipedia.org 
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 21900
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;de.wikipedia.org.  IN  

;; ANSWER SECTION:
de.wikipedia.org.   59  IN  CNAME   wikipedia-lb.wikimedia.org.
wikipedia-lb.wikimedia.org. 392 IN  CNAME   text-lb.ulsfo.wikimedia.org.
text-lb.ulsfo.wikimedia.org. 3392 IN2620:0:863:ed1a::1

;; Query time: 1 msec
;; SERVER: 2001:470:f00e:223::1#53(2001:470:f00e:223::1)
;; WHEN: Wed May 14 08:40:19 2014
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 143

$ ping 198.35.26.96
PING 198.35.26.96 (198.35.26.96): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 198.35.26.96: icmp_seq=0 ttl=55 time=32.231 ms
64 bytes from 198.35.26.96: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=32.145 ms
^C
--- 198.35.26.96 ping statistics ---
2 packets transmitted, 2 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 32.145/32.188/32.231/0.043 ms

$ ping6 2620:0:863:ed1a::1
PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2001:470:f00e:223:a59c:3e5f:5ada:59bd --> 
2620:0:863:ed1a::1
16 bytes from 2620:0:863:ed1a::1, icmp_seq=0 hlim=58 time=71.956 ms
16 bytes from 2620:0:863:ed1a::1, icmp_seq=1 hlim=58 time=110.577 ms
^C
--- 2620:0:863:ed1a::1 ping6 statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 2 packets received, 33.3% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 71.956/91.267/110.577/19.31

Re: [pfSense] Test

[Kevin Boatswain]

Yes
On May 15, 2014 7:38 AM, "Brian Caouette"  wrote:

> Am I still on the list?
> ___
> List mailing list
> List@lists.pfsense.org
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

[pfSense] Test

[Brian Caouette]

Am I still on the list?
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Re: [pfSense] Recommendations for Analyzing Firewall logs

[Jens Kühnel]

Hi Robert,

if you are curios I wrote a bachelor thesis about stuctured
Logmanagement inkl. logstash, graylog2, ELSA, octopussy, rsyslog,
syslog-ng,

You can find it at http://it-hure.de/

CU
Jens
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list