[pfSense Support] MAC Filtering
Hello guys, I need to build a bridging firewall with MAC address based rules. Is pfsense capable of doing the trick? If not (as I guessed from the features) how can I achieve my goal? Thank you for the help. r3N0oV4
[pfSense Support] Cheap appliance for pfSense
Does someone know any small and cheap appliance with a minimum of 3 ethernet interfaces and compatible with pfSense? Thank you. r3N0oV4
[pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Cheap appliance for pfSense
And About How mush is for an Alix 2D3? And where can I find good on-line reseller? I'm in Italy. Thanks Da: Altrasys [mailto:conta...@altrasys.fr] Inviato: venerdì 23 gennaio 2009 11.09 A: support@pfsense.com Oggetto: Re: [pfSense Support] Cheap appliance for pfSense It all depends on what you define by cheap. An ALIX 2D3 is quite small and can be considered as cheap for somes. Regards Sébastien Le 23 janv. 09 à 10:53, Quirino Santilli a écrit : Does someone know any small and cheap appliance with a minimum of 3 ethernet interfaces and compatible with pfSense? Thank you. r3N0oV4
[pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Cheap appliance for pfSense
You are right, but in some cases is not the right solution. Many customers don't like an old pc in the office... However thanks to you and to the pfSense developers and supporters... r3N0oV4 -Messaggio originale- Da: Tim Dickson [mailto:tdick...@calistogaranch.com] Inviato: venerdì 23 gennaio 2009 17.54 A: support@pfsense.com Oggetto: RE: [pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Cheap appliance for pfSense Used equipment is generally cheap :) The beauty if PfSense is that it will run on standard run-of-the-mill hardware. Old PIII's rock with pfSense, and almost anyone has those lying around. Grab one, through as many NIC's in as you want - and you have a full install of pfSense that allows you to install packages too! (embedded will not allow packages) -Tim -Original Message- From: Rainer Duffner [mailto:rai...@ultra-secure.de] Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 7:32 AM To: support@pfsense.com Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Cheap appliance for pfSense Quirino Santilli schrieb: And About How mush is for an Alix 2D3? And where can I find good on-line reseller? I’m in Italy. I'd use PCEngines directly, if no reseller for my country was available. Or try to find a reseller in Italy via ebay. But I'd recommend PCEngines. Rainer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
[pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Selling Net4501 and Net4801
I'm interested too... -Messaggio originale- Da: Fuchs, Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Inviato: venerdì 11 luglio 2008 10.21 A: 'support@pfsense.com' Oggetto: AW: [pfSense Support] Selling Net4501 and Net4801 No problem... just for clarification ;-) -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Anders Dahl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Freitag, 11. Juli 2008 09:39 An: support@pfsense.com Betreff: SV: [pfSense Support] Selling Net4501 and Net4801 I'm sorry no. It's only net4801 and net4501 net4801: 233 Mhz CPU, 128 Mbyte SDRAM, 3 Ethernet, 1 serial, USB connector, CF socket, 44 pins IDE connector, 1 Mini-PCI socket, 3.3V PCI connector. net4501: 133 Mhz CPU, 64 Mbyte SDRAM, 3 Ethernet, 1 Serial, CF socket, 1 Mini-PCI socket, 3.3V PCI connector. Anders -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Fuchs, Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 11. juli 2008 09:33 Til: 'support@pfsense.com' Emne: AW: [pfSense Support] Selling Net4501 and Net4801 Net4801-60 ? Regards, Martin -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Anders Dahl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Freitag, 11. Juli 2008 09:26 An: support@pfsense.com Betreff: [pfSense Support] Selling Net4501 and Net4801 Hi all I have some Soekris Net4501 and Net4801 leftover. Since I'm using booth pfsense and monowall, I thought that I would try and sell them here, and then donate the money to both teams, and thereby give you a chance to contribute as well... They come with a CF-card of various sizes, but with no power supply. The shipping cost will be between 35$ and 45$ depending on the destination. Is anyone interested? Kind regards Anders - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] VPN question
I think that creating a new tunnel between the two endpoints, with the new subnet addresses will do the trick. :) Rino -Messaggio originale- Da: Bosco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Inviato: lunedì 17 marzo 2008 17.23 A: support@pfsense.com Oggetto: [pfSense Support] VPN question Hi all, I am looking for some information. I have a server-server VPN/IPSec connection (pfSense 1.2-Release) that makes all 10.0.0.0/8 traffic routed thru this VPN. Now I need also to route 151.X.0.0/16 traffic thru that same VPN. Will anything on PFsense do this ? Thanks in advance JBosco PS: Sorry for the poor english - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] IPSEC with no static ip addresses
My questioni is simple: can I establish an Ipsec vpn between two sites (or mobile clients) with public dynamic ip addresses? And what about NAT-T? Does it works? Thank you. r3N0oV4
[pfSense Support] Squid Authentication with Active Directory
Hi. Since Active directory is an LDAP database and squid supports LDAP authentication does anyone knows if it works? I'm trying, but with no luck. If Yes, does anyone have some examples of the LDAP authentication parameters? LDAP server user DN, LDAP base domain, LDAP search filter, Protocol Version... My domain is Windows 2000 Native so i don't think problems with digital communication signing could be the problem. Thanks. r3N0oV4 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Squid Authentication with Active Directory
What is ADAM and where do i find documentation? Thank you Da: Richard Sperry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Inviato: mer 08/08/2007 13.08 A: support@pfsense.com Cc: Quirino Santilli Oggetto: RE: [pfSense Support] Squid Authentication with Active Directory I think you will have to use ADAM as a bridge to AD. -Original Message- From: Quirino Santilli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 2:13 AM To: support@pfsense.com Subject: [pfSense Support] Squid Authentication with Active Directory Hi. Since Active directory is an LDAP database and squid supports LDAP authentication does anyone knows if it works? I'm trying, but with no luck. If Yes, does anyone have some examples of the LDAP authentication parameters? LDAP server user DN, LDAP base domain, LDAP search filter, Protocol Version... My domain is Windows 2000 Native so i don't think problems with digital communication signing could be the problem. Thanks. r3N0oV4 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] FTP publishing
Any news on the FTP publishing issue in multi wan configurations or on additional ip addresses? I tried publishing on my second wan interface, but only the authentication goes well, in fact when stating an ls or dir the client doesn't receive any information back. Thank you in advance. Rino
[pfSense Support] IPSEC Compressione enabled?
First of all let me say that pfsense rocks... A simple question: is the ipsec compression enabled by default on the pfsense ipsec implementation? If so, are you going to provide a check box to disable this setting? Thanks in advance. r3N0oV4
[pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Syslog logs reading
This is not what I'm needing. I need something to analyze the logs from the pfSense syslog output. Do you know something that is good and free? Bye Da: Anderson Carli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Inviato: martedì 3 luglio 2007 17.37 A: support@pfsense.com Oggetto: RES: [pfSense Support] Syslog logs reading Take a look in syslog desktop: http://www.sysrose.com/ Its nice and simple. Cheers, De: Quirino Santilli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Enviada em: terça-feira, 3 de julho de 2007 11:06 Para: support@pfsense.com Assunto: [pfSense Support] Syslog logs reading Do you know any good software to read the pfsense logs output? I'm using the 3com syslog server to collect the data but now I need to read it in a comprensive way. Regards
[pfSense Support] Multi WAN Load-balancing and Fail-over
Hello, I'm finally going to install pfsense in production for his load-balancing and fail-over features. I need to load balance the outgoing traffic and publish the classic SMTP, http and PPTP services on both the wan interfaces. Which version of pfsense is right for me? 1.01 or 1.0.2 beta? Thank you in advance. Rino
[pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Publishing over 2 WAN connections
As I wrote: OPT1: 192.168.0.200/24, so this is not the lan interface, but the OPT1... -Messaggio originale- Da: sai [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Inviato: martedì 8 maggio 2007 10.43 A: support@pfsense.com Oggetto: Re: [pfSense Support] Publishing over 2 WAN connections 172.16.0.2:80 - 192.168.0.200:80 - 192.168.0.36:4196 SYN_SENT:ESTABLISHED. This is a connection from your LAN not from OPT. sai On 5/8/07, Quirino Santilli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, I'm dealing again with the task of publishing my servers' services over two different internet connections (in conjuncion with load balancing outgoing traffic over the same internet connections). Now I'll give you more detailed informations. My firewall is a pc with pfsense upgraded at the latest version available (pfSense-Full-Update-1.2-BETA-1-TESTING-SNAPSHOT-05-02-07). It has three interfaces Lan, Wan and Opt1: LAN: 172.16.0.1/24 WAN: 217.x.x.202/27 - with gw 217.x.x.193 OPT1: 192.168.0.200/24 - with gw 192.168.0.1 In my internal network I have a web server with the ip address 172.16.0.2. I NAT'ed the port 80 using Port Forward on both WAN and OPT1 using the address of the internal web server (172.16.0.2). The strange thing is that if i try to access my web server from the WAN ip address, everything works correctly and I can browse my web pages, but if i try to browse the web server using the OPT1 address, both using telnet on port 80 and internet explorer, the connection times out. The content of the firewall states related to this problem is: 172.16.0.2:80 - 192.168.0.200:80 - 192.168.0.36:4196 SYN_SENT:ESTABLISHED. Furthermore, even if I explicitly deny the ICMP traffic on the OPT1 interface, it replies to ping requests. All the described problems doesn't happen if I remove the gateway from the OPT1's interface configuration (but this is needed for policy routing in multi wan environments) Can you help me? Regards r3N0oV4 P.S.: This is the second post of my question because no one answered to me. There's something wrong in it? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] Publishing over 2 WAN connections
Hi All, I'm dealing again with the task of publishing my servers' services over two different internet connections (in conjuncion with load balancing outgoing traffic over the same internet connections). Now I'll give you more detailed informations. My firewall is a pc with pfsense upgraded at the latest version available (pfSense-Full-Update-1.2-BETA-1-TESTING-SNAPSHOT-05-02-07). It has three interfaces Lan, Wan and Opt1: LAN: 172.16.0.1/24 WAN: 217.x.x.202/27 - with gw 217.x.x.193 OPT1: 192.168.0.200/24 - with gw 192.168.0.1 In my internal network I have a web server with the ip address 172.16.0.2. I NAT'ed the port 80 using Port Forward on both WAN and OPT1 using the address of the internal web server (172.16.0.2). The strange thing is that if i try to access my web server from the WAN ip address, everything works correctly and I can browse my web pages, but if i try to browse the web server using the OPT1 address, both using telnet on port 80 and internet explorer, the connection times out. The content of the firewall states related to this problem is: 172.16.0.2:80 - 192.168.0.200:80 - 192.168.0.36:4196 SYN_SENT:ESTABLISHED. Furthermore, even if I explicitly deny the ICMP traffic on the OPT1 interface, it replies to ping requests. All the described problems doesn't happen if I remove the gateway from the OPT1's interface configuration (but this is needed for policy routing in multi wan environments) Can you help me? Regards r3N0oV4 P.S.: This is the second post of my question because no one answered to me. There's something wrong in it?
[pfSense Support] Publishing over 2 WAN connections
Hi All, I'm dealing again with the task of publishing my servers' services over two different internet connections (in conjuncion with load balancing outgoing traffic over the same internet connections). Now I'll give you more detailed informations. My firewall is a pc with pfsense upgraded at the latest version available (pfSense-Full-Update-1.2-BETA-1-TESTING-SNAPSHOT-05-02-07). It has three interfaces Lan, Wan and Opt1: LAN: 172.16.0.1/24 WAN: 217.x.x.202/27 - with gw 217.x.x.193 OPT1: 192.168.0.200/24 - with gw 192.168.0.1 In my internal network I have a web server with the ip address 172.16.0.2. I NAT'ed the port 80 using Port Forward on both WAN and OPT1 using the address of the internal web server (172.16.0.2). The strange thing is that if i try to access my web server from the WAN ip address, everything works correctly and I can browse my web pages, but if i try to browse the web server using the OPT1 address, both using telnet on port 80 and internet explorer, the connection times out. The content of the firewall states related to this problem is: 172.16.0.2:80 - 192.168.0.200:80 - 192.168.0.36:4196 SYN_SENT:ESTABLISHED. Furthermore, even if I explicitly deny the ICMP traffic on the OPT1 interface, it replies to ping requests. All the described problems doesn't happen if I remove the gateway from the OPT1's interface configuration (but this is needed for policy routing in multi wan environments) Can you help me? Regards r3N0oV4
[pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Publishing over 2 WAN Connections
My Firewall states underline the fact that the connection between the client and the web server remains pending. I already encountered a similar situation, and the problem was related with the web server which was not using the publishing firewall as the default gateway. Now the default gateway is right but I really don't know what to change in the firewall configuration to make the web server's answer packets come backup through the same public interface... Regards r3n0ov4 -Messaggio originale- Da: sai [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Inviato: giovedì 3 maggio 2007 10.41 A: support@pfsense.com Oggetto: Re: [pfSense Support] Publishing over 2 WAN Connections You mean that you can access the web site using one IP address, but not the other IP address? Or are you using the domain name? What does the states page show about the connections that are made/attempted? sai On 5/2/07, Quirino Santilli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I was trying to publish a web server over both my 2 wan connections, but only one is working properly. It's important to say that I already created a balancer pool that seems to work correctly. I also tried to change the gateway in the allow rules, but nothing changed. Is there something I missed? Regards r3N0oV4 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] Publishing over 2 WAN Connections
Hello, I was trying to publish a web server over both my 2 wan connections, but only one is working properly. It's important to say that I already created a balancer pool that seems to work correctly. I also tried to change the gateway in the allow rules, but nothing changed. Is there something I missed? Regards r3N0oV4
[pfSense Support] Load Balancer Behaviour
Scott (pfsense support), please help me, when adding a load balancer pool I can't see the interface name (WAN for example) preceding the |(Wan check ip). This is a fresh install with the latest snapshot and I can't figure hot why is going in this sense for me. I tried recreating the pools, but there's no way. Can you please help me? 10x in advance. r3N0oV4 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Load Balancer Behaviour?
It doesn't worked for me. Any ideas? r3N0oV4 -Messaggio originale- Da: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Inviato: venerdì 20 aprile 2007 18.55 A: support@pfsense.com Oggetto: Re: [pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Load Balancer Behaviour? Remove the members of the pool and re-add them. Scott On 4/20/07, Quirino Santilli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Furthermore, looking at the routing table the WanMonitorIpAddress and the Wan2MonitorIpAddress share the same gateway, the default gateway. I think that it's not a visualization problem, It really doesn't fetch the interfaces when adding a Load Balancer Pool. 10x in advance. r3N0oV4 -Messaggio originale- Da: Quirino Santilli Inviato: venerdì 20 aprile 2007 10.15 A: 'support@pfsense.com' Oggetto: R: [pfSense Support] Load Balancer Behaviour? Ok, I updated and the issue solved, but now when adding a Load Balancer Pool in the list field I see something strange: on my howto the list format is WAN|(WanMonitorIpAddress) and WAN2|(Wan2MonitorIpAddress). On my firewall installation the results are different, the list field is in that format: |(WanMonitorIpAddress) and |(Wan2MonitorIpAddress). It seems like that the Interfaces in the resulting config is missing. Even when I look at the load balancer's list the Server/Gateway field is empty and the monitor field has no corresponding interface. Is it a configuration problem? 10x r3N0oV4 -Messaggio originale- Da: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Inviato: giovedì 19 aprile 2007 19.35 A: support@pfsense.com Oggetto: Re: [pfSense Support] Load Balancer Behaviour? On 4/19/07, Quirino Santilli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was finally configuring pfSense as a multi-wan / load-balancing / fail-over firewall for my company when i found something strange. Looking at the howto at this address http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Multi-Wan/Load-Balancing i found that the load-balancer had a behaviour field that in my 1.0.1 installation is not available. To make you believe I'm not fooling, you can find attached the interface that comes out in my installation and the one available on the howto. Can you tell me why? Upgrade to a recent snapshot. http://snapshots.pfsense.com/FreeBSD6/RELENG_1/ Scott - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Load Balancer Behaviour?
Furthermore, looking at the routing table the WanMonitorIpAddress and the Wan2MonitorIpAddress share the same gateway, the default gateway. I think that it's not a visualization problem, It really doesn't fetch the interfaces when adding a Load Balancer Pool. 10x in advance. r3N0oV4 -Messaggio originale- Da: Quirino Santilli Inviato: venerdì 20 aprile 2007 10.15 A: 'support@pfsense.com' Oggetto: R: [pfSense Support] Load Balancer Behaviour? Ok, I updated and the issue solved, but now when adding a Load Balancer Pool in the list field I see something strange: on my howto the list format is WAN|(WanMonitorIpAddress) and WAN2|(Wan2MonitorIpAddress). On my firewall installation the results are different, the list field is in that format: |(WanMonitorIpAddress) and |(Wan2MonitorIpAddress). It seems like that the Interfaces in the resulting config is missing. Even when I look at the load balancer's list the Server/Gateway field is empty and the monitor field has no corresponding interface. Is it a configuration problem? 10x r3N0oV4 -Messaggio originale- Da: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Inviato: giovedì 19 aprile 2007 19.35 A: support@pfsense.com Oggetto: Re: [pfSense Support] Load Balancer Behaviour? On 4/19/07, Quirino Santilli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was finally configuring pfSense as a multi-wan / load-balancing / fail-over firewall for my company when i found something strange. Looking at the howto at this address http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Multi-Wan/Load-Balancing i found that the load-balancer had a behaviour field that in my 1.0.1 installation is not available. To make you believe I'm not fooling, you can find attached the interface that comes out in my installation and the one available on the howto. Can you tell me why? Upgrade to a recent snapshot. http://snapshots.pfsense.com/FreeBSD6/RELENG_1/ Scott - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] R: [pfSense Support] Load Balancer Behaviour?
Ok, I updated and the issue solved, but now when adding a Load Balancer Pool in the list field I see something strange: on my howto the list format is WAN|(WanMonitorIpAddress) and WAN2|(Wan2MonitorIpAddress). On my firewall installation the results are different, the list field is in that format: |(WanMonitorIpAddress) and |(Wan2MonitorIpAddress). It seems like that the Interfaces in the resulting config is missing. Even when I look at the load balancer's list the Server/Gateway field is empty and the monitor field has no corresponding interface. Is it a configuration problem? 10x r3N0oV4 -Messaggio originale- Da: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Inviato: giovedì 19 aprile 2007 19.35 A: support@pfsense.com Oggetto: Re: [pfSense Support] Load Balancer Behaviour? On 4/19/07, Quirino Santilli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was finally configuring pfSense as a multi-wan / load-balancing / fail-over firewall for my company when i found something strange. Looking at the howto at this address http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Multi-Wan/Load-Balancing i found that the load-balancer had a behaviour field that in my 1.0.1 installation is not available. To make you believe I'm not fooling, you can find attached the interface that comes out in my installation and the one available on the howto. Can you tell me why? Upgrade to a recent snapshot. http://snapshots.pfsense.com/FreeBSD6/RELENG_1/ Scott - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] IPSEC questions
Hi guys, my head is crashing again with the connection problem between my pfSense branch office firewall and my main Microsoft ISA 2004 trough IPSEC. Yesterday in the microsoft docs i found informations about establishing an IPSEC connection between ISA 2004 and smoothwall, a linux based firewall with a Freeswan implementation. The first thing i noticed in this howto is that on the smoothwall side the 'Compression' checkbox in the IPSEC policies is not flagged. In pfSense there are no settings regarding the 3des compression, but debugging pfSense's SA Proposal I noticed the '3des-cbc' value. So the questions are: 1) does pfSense use a compressed 3des ipsec policy? 2) is it possible it deactivate it? 3) does pfSense automatically understand that the other side is offering a non compressed 3des policy? I hope this will help in troubleshooting. Rino - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] IPSEC connection w/ ISA 2004
Does anyone successfully estabilished an IPSEC tunnel connection between pfSense and Microsoft ISA server 2004. I tried but unsuccessfully because of some problems in the ISA server SA proposal decodification. Thank you for your help. P.S.: I'm using ISA server 2004 because of the web proxy features and I can't extempt this. Regards Santilli Quirino -- 2 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] IPSEC connection w/ ISA 2004
Does anyone successfully estabilished an IPSEC tunnel connection between pfSense and Microsoft ISA server 2004. I tried but unsuccessfully because of some problems in the ISA server SA proposal decodification. Thank you for your help. P.S.: I'm using ISA server 2004 because of the web proxy features and I can't extempt this. Regards Santilli Quirino -- 1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[pfSense Support] Squid and HAVP
Dear Sirs, I'm having many problems with Squid and HAVP packages. I don't know if this the right place to ask for support but I'll try. The first one (squid) stop on every configuration change and I have to reboot the pfsense machine to bring it back up. Furthermore I'am quite sure that it doesn't uses the upstream proxy even if I setup one in the gui. The second one (HAVP) when browsing SSL protected pages gives back a web page saying: 'invalid request'. I know that the SSL web traffic is cyphered but how can I solve the problem? Thank you. Santilli Quirino - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
