Re: [pfSense-discussion] Snmp monitoring

2010-09-06 Thread Robert Mortimer
You can always check for the same two IP addresses that you load balancer does.

- Original Message -
 Hi everyone!
 
 Is there any recommended way to monitor the Load Balancer status over
 snmp?
 
 I mean, I'd like to setup an alarm that would check over SNMP if one
 of
 the internet uplinks is down, or if one of the load balanced servers
 is
 unreacheable from the firewall.
 
 
 Thanks!
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: discussion-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
 For additional commands, e-mail: discussion-h...@pfsense.com
 
 Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
Blue Chip Technology Limited. Chowley Oak Lane, Tattenhall, Chester, Cheshire 
CH3 9EX Tel: 01829 772000 Registered in England 3110403 Vat No: GB 618 374134

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discussion-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: discussion-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org



Re: [pfSense-discussion] override routes on WAN

2010-05-04 Thread Robert Mortimer

- Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote:

 I'm attempting to simulate a production network 88.198.238.112/28
 with gateway 88.198.238.113 on the OPT1 interface (set to
 88.198.238.113)
 but I'm too dense to figure out how override the default route, which
 sends
 the packet to WAN.
 
 I obviously need to do something along the lines of
 route add -net 88.198.238.112/28 88.198.238.113

I'm not quite understanding but:-

To route traffic you need distinct sub-nets. If you have the same subnet (or an 
overlap) on two interfaces of the pfsense box this is effectively an 
un-routable combination. Setting the gateway is something that happens on the 
client machine either by DHCP or manual settings carried out localy. The 
pfSense box will have a default route to it's next hop/gateway.

Are attempting to set the clinet routing or pfSense routing when you talk about 
route add -net 88.198.238.112/28 88.198.238.113?

The production network and the test network need total isolation with their own 
routes to the internet in order to get the routing to work without a lot of 
hassle

Rob

 
 Help?
 
 -- 
 Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a 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
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: discussion-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
 For additional commands, e-mail: discussion-h...@pfsense.com
 
 Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
Blue Chip Technology Limited. Chowley Oak Lane, Tattenhall, Chester, Cheshire 
CH3 9EX

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discussion-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: discussion-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org



Re: [pfSense-discussion] start on safe mode

2009-01-19 Thread Robert Mortimer

Chris Buechler wrote: 

On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 3:18 AM, Zied Fakhfakh zyd...@gnet.tn wrote: 

Hi,

I need to start pfSense, always on SAFE MODE, can someone point me to a good
documentation ? What do you mean by safe mode?

Zydoon wrote: 

when I start pfSense normally it hangs somewhere at a line like this: 
ehci0  
but when I choose the 3rd option: Safe Mode, it starts fine, so how do I make 
always choose the 3 option, not the first. 

kind regards, 

Zydoon. 

Robert Wrote:

This is the default FreeBSD boot loader settings see the freeBSD docs

Rob



---
Blue Chip Technology Limited.
Chowley Oak Lane, Tattenhall, Chester, Cheshire CH3 9EX
Tel: 01829 772000
Registered in England 3110403
Vat No: GB 618 374134

Blue Chip Technology Ltd. employees are not authorised to offer or accept 
contractual terms by email unless they are in the form of an attached PDF 
document in the correct company format in accordance with their job role by 
provision of an authorised signature.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discussion-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: discussion-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org



Re: Re[2]: [pfSense-discussion] Multiple IP on WAN

2006-08-20 Thread Robert Mortimer

I'm not quite clear, is this what you are looking for

Give the WAN the public IP address you want for LAN access
Give the LAN NIC the 10.0.0.1 IP address
Set up DHCP
Use DHCP to give static IP addresses to machine you want to be addresses 
from the WAN
Create a number of vlans with your additional public IP addresses on the 
WAN.
1:1 mapp from the vlans on the external interface to the required an 
internal machines
or port foward for the sevices you want to expose on each machine from the 
appropreate vlan


--Robert


Hiya, nope didn't work.. (Im using RC2)

Basically here is my setup.

8 public ips from my isp.

I share my home internet with 10.0.0.0/8 range and some of these
public ips on other machines.

I would like the router to have

10.0.0.1 and my-public-ip-1


Then my other workstations/servers that have real public ips use
my-public-ip-1 as the default gateway and use their own public ips
ok

Then workstations without real public ips, then they just route using
the 10.0.0 range and use the public ip on that router.

I've tried no end of combinations to get it working. The virtual ips
dont work properly (ie.. cannot ping that ip).. The only thing I can
do is assign virtual ip and do advanced outbound nat for vhosts.

You know the WAN interface? I would like to have multiple ips there.

** exactly like ifconfig and adding an alias.

The only ways I can see on pfsense is 1) do the alias manually in
shell or 2) add another NIC. But the NIC would cause a loop in the
network. :(

Thanks,
Chris

===8==Original message text===

You can add additional IPs at firewallVirtual IP. After you added
them there you can use these for NAT. Make sure you add appropriate
firewallrules for this additional traffic (let them autocreate when
using protforwarding, it sets up the right rules for you).



Holger



-Original Message-
From: Robert Mortimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 10:55 PM
To: discussion@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense-discussion] Multiple IP on WAN


Try

Interfaces  Assign  VLAN

I think this is what you want

---Robert

- Original Message - 
From: Chris Noble [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: discussion@pfsense.com
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 7:27 PM
Subject: [pfSense-discussion] Multiple IP on WAN



 Hi there,

 I have 8 ips with my isp and would like to use PPPoE on my
 linksys router.. I can do this but for 1 ip.

 Is there anywhere that I can set a local ip eg 10.0.0.1/8 and then
 my isp ip range which is say 123.123.123.1/29. One IP is a dedicated
 router IP and I would like that ip on the pfsense router. It can be
 done manually if I ssh into the machine, but cannot find anywhere to
 add another ip to the WAN interface.

 I hope I explained it clearly.

 Any ideas?

 Many thanks,
 Chris






===8===End of original message text===






RE: [pfSense-discussion] Limiting access through table virusprot

2006-07-31 Thread Robert Mortimer
 Am Mittwoch, den 26.07.2006, 18:38 -0700 schrieb krt:
  You can do a connection limit on a rule with a specific
 proto/port, i.e.
  simultaneous client connection limit/max state entries per host/max new
  connections per second.
 Yes I know that already. Take a look at the created rulebase and you'll
 notice, that every attempt to connect to any service from the blocked IP
 address (blocked because of the connection limit) will be blocked by
 pfSense. What I suggested was to block only connection attempts to the
 service that caused the blocking (just like netfilter does), not to all
 services or every hosts behind pfSense at all. Bill has implemented
 tables, so this might be a reasonable way to go.

 BR,
   PIT


As a lot of viruses try to send email I have blocked outbound SMTP from
all machines but those on my mailserver list. I have been thinking for
some time that I should look at twist or similar to report blocked mail
sending attempts. I would also like to block the offending machine entirely
from the outside world and redirect HTTP to a Get help page.

Another alarm bell would be machines looking for MS-SQL servers

Is this the sort of thing that would be useful?


 --
 -
  copyleft(c) by |   /*  * Buddy system. Hairy. You really aren't
  Peter Allgeyer |   _-_ expected to understand this  *  */   --
 | 0(o_o)0   From /usr/src/linux/mm/page_alloc.cA
 ---oOO--(_)--OOo--
 -