I'm very intrigued as to what happened with UBNThere, as Robert, Stig,
and An-Cheng's phone numbers are all in my contact list.
I've called them out on concerns over their gpl tarball and (fairly
recent) lack of SDK as well, but then again, I've also called out
MikroTik... which they've
[One public correction, nothing to do with Godwin's law! -Adam]
On 14-10-23 08:36 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
Not that UBNT is a paragon of openness, either,
“either”? Wow. Strike 2.
That wasn't a dig at you or ESF or NG - I was thinking of Brocade when I
wrote that. I could also use UBNT's
I KNEW IT!!!
:D
On 10/23/2014 5:57 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
and Jim Thompson is actually a blood thirsty, extra-terrestrial, shapeshifting
reptile.
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
I presume UBNT is Ubiquiti?
I'm probably going to start testing their hardware for other
applications (I work in the video surveillance industry as well as high
capacity wifi) and I'd be curious to get some pros/cons from those who
know... so please email me off list (so as not to offend the
I don't get emails either.
On 10/8/2014 12:09 PM, Jason Pyeron wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Brian Caouette
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 11:59
On 10/8/2014 11:39 AM, Jason Pyeron wrote:
I think I am being hit by the same issue.
Here is what I tried:
Version: 2.0.2-RELEASE
I am the CIO of a WISP who uses their products, and does a lot of
alpha/beta testing for them and other vendors... I may be a little biased.
The M series gear is pretty good kit for point to point or point to
multi point applications. AirFiber is great for ~10 mile or less shots,
with
This list is not about Ubiquiti. (At least not until we make pfSense
available on Ubiquiti platforms.)
Please take the discussion elsewhere.
jim
On Oct 24, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote:
I am the CIO of a WISP who uses their products, and does a lot of
Shouldn't the EdgeRouter lite support pfsense with the 2.2 release?
Your own post:
When what I'm trying to do is make pfSense available on an inexpensive
platform. It should perform better than an Alix, even without the
private-SDK stunts.
Jim
from:
Josh,
First, did you not read the part where I said, (At least not until we make
pfSense available on Ubiquiti platforms.)” ??
Note that I’ve *always* said that pfSense software on the ERL will occur
*after* (emphasis: **AFTER**) the regular 2.2 release.
WAIT, BACK UP. DID YOU READ THE AFTER
You said it, man. Nobody fucks with the Jesus.
Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com
On 10/24/2014 02:54 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
Josh,
First, did you not read the part where I said, (At least not until we
make pfSense available on
I did ask the reply to be off-list…
On Oct 24, 2014, at 17:57, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote:
You said it, man. Nobody fucks with the Jesus.
Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com/On 10/24/2014
02:54 PM, Jim Thompson
It's not your fault, it's my fault. I made an apparently poor
assumption that the info might be useful to people on this list in a
small-blurb format. Useful or not, it caused extra background noise.
I'd perfer to let this /offtopic end, if you will.
Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
About a year ago there was a post showing the RFC 5771 packets in the pflog and
the OP did not have any logging rules.
I have a logging rule for my blocks, and this is polluting the log.
Where do they come from and how do I eliminate them?
em0=WAN
em1=LAN
re0=MGMT
NAT is enabled from LAN to
13 matches
Mail list logo
