Re: [pfSense] Restart of pfsense loses Squid's transparent proxyredirect rule

2014-12-02 Thread Chris Murray
Hi everyone, Can anyone help please? The transparent squid firewall rule is not being created correctly. Thank you, Chris -Original Message- From: List [mailto:list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org] On Behalf Of Chris Murray Sent: 11 November 2014 11:56 To: list@lists.pfsense.org Subject

[pfSense] Restart of pfsense loses Squid's transparent proxy redirect rule

2014-11-11 Thread Chris Murray
Hello all, I've experienced this issue before but never got round to asking for help... Now on a fresh install of 2.1.5 64-bit, installed the squid package, set up transparent proxy, restarted, yet there is no firewall rule? : pfctl -sa | grep 3128 Nothing ... Restart the service, still

Re: [pfSense] [Bulk] Re: Another OPT1 routing question

2014-08-13 Thread Chris Murray
...@yahoo.com] Sent: 10 August 2014 15:55 To: pfSense Support and Discussion Mailing List; Chris Murray Cc: comp...@hotrodpc.com Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [pfSense] Another OPT1 routing question You wrote I did correct the MAC address for OPT1, , please note that it is normally not needed to configure

[pfSense] Another OPT1 routing question

2014-08-10 Thread Chris Murray
Hi all, I'm having some confusion with my OPT1 interface. I've found quite a few questions around OPT1 routing, with various solutions too, however none of them seem to be applicable to me. I may be misunderstanding something basic, so please bear with me. I had pfSense inside KVM, with two

Re: [pfSense] Another OPT1 routing question

2014-08-10 Thread Chris Murray
Oh that's odd, they were mixed-up on the console screen and on the option to reassign interfaces. I'd expect em0 em1 and em2 to be enumerated same order as the virtual interfaces presented to the VM, but when reassigning, they were like this: em0 first MAC address (up) em1 third

Re: [pfSense] Another OPT1 routing question

2014-08-10 Thread Chris Murray
They don't now, but the process of reassignment suggested that they did, and that one of them was down. i.e. the Valid interfaces are: list wasn't right. It's now correct though, thanks for that. -Original Message- From: List [mailto:list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org] On Behalf Of compdoc

Re: [pfSense] Another OPT1 routing question

2014-08-10 Thread Chris Murray
with 192.168.yyy.60, it's fine. -Original Message- From: List [mailto:list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org] On Behalf Of Chris Murray Sent: 10 August 2014 16:29 To: pfSense Support and Discussion Mailing List Subject: Re: [pfSense] Another OPT1 routing question They don't now, but the process

Re: [pfSense] Another OPT1 routing question

2014-08-10 Thread Chris Murray
Oh I've got it: lack of default route on 192.168.yyy.40 Just how HTTP was working is still a mystery though. Apologies for the noise! -Original Message- From: List [mailto:list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org] On Behalf Of Chris Murray Sent: 10 August 2014 21:08 To: pfSense Support