Re: [pfSense-discussion] Traffic shaper bug ?
Scott Ullrich wrote on 22-3-2008 23:42: On 3/22/08, RB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: For that matter, is any non-dev actually _running_ 1.3? For quite some time, short of building the whole system myself, performing an update to a fresh test system just results in complete b0rkage (libraries missing & whatnot), same as HEAD has been for months before that. It's not unfixable, but prevents the casual user from testing and the causal developer from contributing. I submitted an FYI ticket on it once, but some anon-tard closed it saying "If you are running HEAD you should know how to fix these breakages yourself! HEAD is for developers only." Helpful chap. Anyone testing these images will be on 1.2 as that thread states. We have made a special version for the contributors of the bounty. Otherwise folks will have to wait until 1.3. And BTW: HEAD != 1.3. HEAD == 2.0 which is far far away. While not unwilling to donate to projects, this bounty thing is not for me because of a strict open source policy. Again, is there any estimate for 1.3? thanks, Jan
[pfSense-discussion] Registration open for pfSense training at BSDCan!
Please see the following post for more information. http://blog.pfsense.org/?p=182 Hope to see you there! Chris
Re: [pfSense-discussion] RELENG_1 library linking (was: Traffic shaper bug ?)
RB wrote: I understand, and have tangled some of the terminology. My ticket was about HEAD, but the library breakage seems to have seeped from HEAD to 1.3 (RELENG_1). Because all the binaries in RELENG_1 and HEAD are for FreeBSD 7.0. You can't go from 1.2 to 1.3 just by pulling the files from CVS, and that'll be true of most if not all different CVS tags. As I know the rest of us are, I'm time constrained and just wish I had a quick way to pull up a running copy of recent development work and see what neat things have been done lately, as well as help test/develop/validate them. To me, following your 'Building pfSense' document is a tedious amount of buildup when I just want to fiddle with some of the PHP or script some back-end functionality. That's what snapshots are for, when 1.3 is ready for wider consumption, snapshots will be available. You won't be able to run 1.3 until that point, and that'll happen soon enough. HEAD should also be testable at that point, with a cvssync from a RELENG_1 install.
[pfSense-discussion] RELENG_1 library linking (was: Traffic shaper bug ?)
> Anyone testing these images will be on 1.2 as that thread states. We > have made a special version for the contributors of the bounty. > Otherwise folks will have to wait until 1.3. And BTW: HEAD != 1.3. > HEAD == 2.0 which is far far away. I understand, and have tangled some of the terminology. My ticket was about HEAD, but the library breakage seems to have seeped from HEAD to 1.3 (RELENG_1). As I know the rest of us are, I'm time constrained and just wish I had a quick way to pull up a running copy of recent development work and see what neat things have been done lately, as well as help test/develop/validate them. To me, following your 'Building pfSense' document is a tedious amount of buildup when I just want to fiddle with some of the PHP or script some back-end functionality. Then again, I could just be doing it (pulling in 1.3) wrong, or you guys might well be less concerned with facilitating community contribution than you are with hunting/squashing bugs yourselves - reasonable, given your limited resources. Wishes != horses. RB
Re: [pfSense-discussion] Traffic shaper bug ?
On 3/22/08, RB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For that matter, is any non-dev actually _running_ 1.3? For quite > some time, short of building the whole system myself, performing an > update to a fresh test system just results in complete b0rkage > (libraries missing & whatnot), same as HEAD has been for months before > that. It's not unfixable, but prevents the casual user from testing > and the causal developer from contributing. > > I submitted an FYI ticket on it once, but some anon-tard closed it > saying "If you are running HEAD you should know how to fix these > breakages yourself! HEAD is for developers only." Helpful chap. Anyone testing these images will be on 1.2 as that thread states. We have made a special version for the contributors of the bounty. Otherwise folks will have to wait until 1.3. And BTW: HEAD != 1.3. HEAD == 2.0 which is far far away. Scott
Re: [pfSense-discussion] Traffic shaper bug ?
> For 1.3, Ermal has done a nice job completely rewriting the traffic > shaper to accommodate these kinds of situations and more. The traffic > shaper in 1.2 only works properly with two interface setups (LAN and WAN). For that matter, is any non-dev actually _running_ 1.3? For quite some time, short of building the whole system myself, performing an update to a fresh test system just results in complete b0rkage (libraries missing & whatnot), same as HEAD has been for months before that. It's not unfixable, but prevents the casual user from testing and the causal developer from contributing. I submitted an FYI ticket on it once, but some anon-tard closed it saying "If you are running HEAD you should know how to fix these breakages yourself! HEAD is for developers only." Helpful chap.
RE: [pfSense-discussion] SIP Problems
I've installed this package on my 1.2pfsense, the service siproxd is started, but in the services is stopped. Which way have i look plese? 2nd. Qustion, is this proxy transparent or do I need set on all SIPaware device this proxy on my pfSense (if will work ad1) :-) thanks -Original Message- From: Ziv Gabel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 7:26 PM To: discussion@pfsense.com Subject: Re: [pfSense-discussion] SIP Problems Curtis LaMasters wrote: > Yes it will if you use the SIPROXD package. Your original question > stated that you would like to disable any SIP rewrite if pfSense did > it. You don't need to disable anything unless you have that package > installed. Does that answer your question? > > > -- > Curtis LaMasters > http://www.curtis-lamasters.com > http://www.builtnetworks.com Yes thank you
Re: [pfSense-discussion] Traffic shaper bug ?
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 4:42 AM, Jan Hoevers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chris Buechler wrote on 21-3-2008 23:22: > > > For 1.3, Ermal has done a nice job completely rewriting the traffic > > shaper to accommodate these kinds of situations and more. The traffic > > shaper in 1.2 only works properly with two interface setups (LAN and WAN). > > Right now I'm running traffic shaping on an extra pfSense box, just to > avoid this multi interface issue. Planning to move away to a bare > FreeBSD/PF/ALTQ setup because of this, would prefer to stay with pfSense > however. > Do you have any clue when the new features become available? > http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,2718.0.html Take a look there is a bounty in there which explains the details and how you can get it before 1.3.(You may want to skip the first pages though, it is rather large thread). > One suggestion: give us an option to bypass this annoying traffic > shaping wizard. I know it's possible to delete the generated setup once > the wizard has completed, but that's not really nice for those who > cannot use the standard setup. It is not anymore fired by default since now there are multiple wizards. > > Another suggestion: it would make a real difference if it were possible > to make rules without specifying *both* the incoming and outgoing > interface. ALTQ has that option, so perhaps you are planning that already. Yes, on the new version you specify queues on specific rules, as you do on FreeBSD/PF/ALTQ, you create on the firewall->rules tab. There is no more a rule tab at the traffic shaper config. Ermal > > best regards, > Jan Hoevers >
