I have a client who was using Linux as a proxy server it had this one LAN
interface and a WAN, LAN NIC in the virtual one he had, as follows: eth0: 1,
eth0: 2, eth0: 3, so he had:
We kind of already answered this one yesterday... but
What you want to do will not work like they had it on the
Everything is working fine, with load balance between the links, redundancy
etc... the issue is only with the IP to test if the gateway is up or not
You have to have a SEPARATE IP for each monitor address...
If you are going out through the same gateway, than traceroute out on the net
About a year ago, I switched to running the full pfSense 2.0 (beta something
at the time) on a Kingston SS100S2/8G embedded SSD.
I installed the 30G version in 12 systems, all of which failed within 6 months.
I moved to Intel 320s and/or WD Greens (depending on budget of the site) so
we'll
Now I'm trying to segment the /24 into 4 subnets with the pfSense interfaces
being:
It sounds easy enough - but may be because I'm not understanding exactly what
you want.
But the simplest method I could come up with would be to setup your WAN to
accept every IP your ISP routes to you, then
Has anyone experience this or how can i have a fix to the problem.
Unable to reach that file from here either... Looks like the packages 7.2
folder was removed from the FTP server.
See here: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/
-Tim
I thought so, but that does not seem to work either.
Make sure you power cycle the router that is passing that subnet to your
firewall.
I had this same issue when I set this up, and racked my head for hours before
doing that.
I opted for the separate interface approach when I did the
No 2.0 as Xmas present this year?
---
I don't see this happening really, a RC could be possible, but that's unlikely
too.
Per Scott on Twitter (@sullrich)
Now is the time to speak up if you know of any issues in pfSense. Final push
to RC1 begins today. Speak up now or forever hold your...
Is there a way in PF to have dhcp assign a custom gateway in the static dhcp
setup.
Why don't you whitelist the IPs you want to pass in the captive portal
configuration.
They would all go through the captive portal, but those IPs assigned to bypass
wouldn't be blocked.
-Tim
Does pfsense have a package which would allow me to send a link to a
big file sitting on my network that someone can either ftp or scp safely?
Take a look at http://openupload.sf.net/
Not a package, but a nice web utility
-
Contacting you off the board, as I have questions about the other firewall
software you carry. What do you think of Vyatta and Untangled? I came from
using m0n0wall so naturally recommend pfSense to my clients, but wanted to
know if you think either of the others are better.
I use both
I don't know the IP addresses of the SSH servers on the Internet.
Then only allow to the SSH servers you know/want? You can go either way...
block all and allow only certain IPs
Or allow all, and block certain IPs
On 2.0 you can block by OS type too...
I disagree with this statement. What makes you believe this?
Windows has had built-in, default firewalling for quite some time, as has
almost every desktop distribution of linux. SOHO firewalls that don't
firewall IPv6 don't do so because they're generally not IPv6 capable (see
PFSense for
I still don't follow. NAT is not a security mechanism, and MAC addresses are
not privileged information.
True, but once you know the MAC you can find out the vendor quite easily, and
then go about running exploits specific to that piece of hardware.
Adam - While that's certainly true,
Just installed pfsense on linux locked myself out.
pfSense runs on FreeBSD - how'd you manage that!? ;)
If you have an SSH session there is a prompt to reset the webmin password -
just hit that.
If you are on linux with a VM (maybe that's what you are talking about) - then
use the VM console
It is posible to make load balancing whit 2 acounts of 30mbps from the same
ISP?
For the current release you have to put another device in front of one of the
WANs so that it has a separate gateway.
-tim
-
To unsubscribe,
Hi,
has anyone tried loading a .png file format to pfsense 1.2.3 captive portal
File Manager since only .jpg file format is only allowed.
I'm having a .png file in which i would like to use since it displays on my
login .html page perfectly, can anyone advise how could we allow other
... Any idea as to 1.x and not plugging a cable into WAN while bridging 2 OPTs?
Setup WAN to a VLAN - just to get it out of the way...
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail:
How would I go about not doing what I suggest above but instead setting WAN
to a VLAN as you suggest?
When setting up your NICS - choose YES to add VLANS.
Just add some extra VLANS even if you aren't using them.
OR you can set it up in the GUI after, by adding VLANS then assigning to the
any help on how could i connect to the client PC's on my pfsense LAN
interface as current i set my LAN interface to DHCP pool address.
Take a look here:
http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/OpenVPN_Bridging
I'm assuming that's what you are asking...
➢ if you are saying PPTP not being the most secure means of VPN which VPN i
sthe most secure to use ???
I’ll take this off list – as it’s been covered before – I’ll email you
directly, Joseph.
-tim
.
Any advise on having a secure VPN tunneling.
Cheers,
Joseph.
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Tim Dickson
tdick...@aubergeresorts.commailto:tdick...@aubergeresorts.com wrote:
well strange because i can access my box with the following
http://IPhttp://ip/ address:443 how is it possible as you
Errr After all that - forgot to change the TO: ... sorry list!
could not access by pfsense box.
Joseph.
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 5:18 AM, Tim Dickson tdick...@aubergeresorts.com
wrote:
-- any hint on how to apply https over the INTERNET to my PFSENSE box ???
Enable HTTPS (443) on the WAN interface in your ruleset.
-- and how could i access my LAN
well strange because i can access my box with the following http://IP
address:443 how is it possible as you you've said it should be https://IP
address:443
If you setup HTTP as port 443 I this would work - kind of goes against web
standards - but it's your box :) - you probably just didn't
-- any hint on how to apply https over the INTERNET to my PFSENSE box ???
Enable HTTPS (443) on the WAN interface in your ruleset.
-- and how could i access my LAN (clients PC)
You were correct with VPN being the best way. You could put port forwards in
as well, and you could also enable SSH
The 1.2.2 and 1.2.3 GUI interface section does indeed allow for
definition of multiple VLAN IDs -- but exactly one IPv4 address per
physical interface.
Define the VLAN and it becomes an interface in the GUI where you can define an
IP/subnet.
I currently have 5 VLANs (with separate IP and
and in the WAN2 interface,I set Type to static,IP address to
192.168.1.254/32,Gateway to 192.168.1.1.
I believe you want it to be 192.168.1.254/24
Right now the gateway and static IP are in two different subnets.
-tim
-
To
-Original Message-
From: Sean Cavanaugh [mailto:millenia2...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 9:18 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: RE: [pfSense Support] Old Firebox question
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 08:18:13 -0800
From:
From: Matt [mailto:mnaism...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 5:05 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Support] Port forward beyond local internal
subnet.
Hi,
I have a router behind pfsense with multiple internal subnets
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Jim Pingle li...@pingle.org wrote:
Chris Buechler wrote:
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Curtis LaMasters
curtislamast...@gmail.com wrote:
I've searched around and read about others with this issue. Basically
I have 5 different Vista laptops that cannot get a
-Original Message-
From: Curtis LaMasters [mailto:curtislamast...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:50 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] 192.0.2.112
I'm not sure how the dynamic dns daemon works on pf, however I could
possibly understand this issue if
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 3:55 PM, li...@mgreg.comli...@mgreg.com wrote:
Hi All,
I've decided to give pfSense a go. When I initially installed it about (20
mins ago), everything seemed to work just fine. Now, however, I can ping
and
SSH to all machines behind the pfSense box, but I can't
One way to do it is to setup an 1:1 NAT rule (you can do this in addition to
your standard port forward) then setup a rule on your LAN interface for the
10.10.10.10 IP and set its GW as the OPT1 IP.
-Tim
From: Ron Lemon [mailto:r...@maplewood.com]
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 12:32 PM
To:
And again... not to take away from pfsense.
But untangle has some filtering. ( I actually use pfsense for our
firewall/vpn/routing etc... and untangle for web/protocol filtering)
As a firewall it is severely lacking, but is a half decent web/protocol
filter - at least for those that are free.
- Lunix1618 [mailto:lunix1...@gmail.com]
Hello everybody,
I am in study phase to do a Wireless network and requirement is need to
force users authenticate first. I figured out that can be done with
Captive Portal feature of pfsense. However, I want to know if anybody
did a Wifi network
Thinking out loud here.
But the static routes are only for those subnets which are not directly
routable to the interface. I'm assuming your vpn concentrator takes care of
that already?
I think you'd be better off setting up the LAN3 as a gateway and routing
your packets with rules? ( any with
Just looking at this quickly... looks like you are trying to route two networks
without having two networks.
What I mean is you have the same subnet for both of your networks, so the
pfsense boxes don't know whether to route internally or push to the other
pfsense box.
You need a separate
22, 2009 4:32 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] bridging 2 networks with pfsense+openvpn
2009/4/23 Tim Dickson tdick...@calistogaranch.com:
Just looking at this quickly... looks like you are trying to route two
networks without having two networks.
What I mean is you
it
-Original Message-
From: Tim Dickson [mailto:tdick...@calistogaranch.com]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 4:19 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [SPAM] RE: [pfSense Support] RE: [SPAM] RE: [pfSense Support]
RE: [SPAM] Re: [pfSense Support] RE: [SPAM] Re: [pfSense Support]
website
browsing
It all
Sounds like you are pulling at straws here - but try and find out what the
root of your problem is. If your packets are fragmented, then yes this will
slow things down - but it could be totally irrelevant to your issue.
If you bypass pfSense is everything fine?
How do your traffic graphs look?
that many ?
-Original Message-
From: Tim Dickson [mailto:tdick...@calistogaranch.com]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 2:54 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [SPAM] RE: [pfSense Support] RE: [SPAM] Re: [pfSense Support]
RE: [SPAM] Re: [pfSense Support] website browsing
Sounds like you
Remember rules are top down... so make sure you don't have an allow rule
ahead of it.
-Tim
From: Abdulrehman [mailto:arvagabo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 2:12 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Block LAN ip from communicating
Which version of Pfsense
I'm assuming they mean to enable UPnP...
Not sure of all the security risks, but it does allow programs to designate
ports for their use.
Others on the list probably no more details about UPnP, you can always
reference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UPnP
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: Joe
I had this same issue with fedex.com a while back
Adjusted mtu, did a fresh install, never could find a solution... one day it
started working again.
(weird thing was half our clients could connect and half could not.)
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: Tim Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just my 2cents, but ntop is VERY unstable right now (and not maintained as
you can see)
I would avoid putting it on your box... instead run it on a separate box if
you want to use it.
I've never had it crash my pfSense box, but keeping it(ntop) running is a
whole nother story... you'll be lucky
Multiple incoming should already work
the issue is connecting multiple
internal devices to the same external pptp server.
1.2.1 is supposed to have addressed that issue to, so if thats what you
meant then try it out. As written, it should already be working.
-Tim
From: Samer Chaer
Yes ;)
-Original Message-
From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ugo Bellavance
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:50 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Support] Re: PPTP and NAT
Chris Buechler wrote:
Ugo Bellavance wrote:
Hi,
Is there a way to make it possible
Tested using those tests, out of curiosity - and we passed with flying
colors.
Could it be your ISPs DNS that is bad? (that pfSense is relaying?) and not
pfSense directly?
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: Beat Siegenthaler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 1:11 PM
To:
Find another method, or set up an outside IP for every client.
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ugo Bellavance
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 3:43 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Support] Re: PPTP and NAT
Ugo Bellavance wrote:
Hi,
Ntop can be usefull.
If you can keep it running ;)... I recommend throwing it on another machine
though
I've had a world of trouble keeping the service up in pfSense
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: Richard Sperry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 2:06 PM
To:
Are you just trying to change the look of pfsense?
If so you can do this in the current build with themes.
Youll want to SFTP over to the server and browse to
/usr/local/www/themes
(your SFTP login is root - your password is the password you set in the
GUI )
Just download one of the existing
A drawing would make things easier:
But if you set your portforward up, you'll also have to setup rules.
I'm assuming that when you say on DMZ that your apache server is on a
separate interface called DMZ?
If so you'll want to add rules in your LAN interface to allow it access to
your DMZ
WAN
Balancing?
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: Chris Buechler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 6:02 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] CP Issue
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Tim Dickson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did state Squid
Thanks Chris and Team
-Original Message-
From: Chris Buechler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 4:07 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] CP Issue
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 7:04 PM, Tim Dickson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well I don't have squid
PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 1:47 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] CP Issue
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 3:51 AM, Tim Dickson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Setting up the Rule to put traffic to the interface address out the
default
gateway did not work
Setting
]
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 10:46 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] CP Issue
On 4/24/08, Tim Dickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(I'll be back on site tomorrow and will test)
So it would be on the GUEST LAN:
Proto: TCP
Source: GuestLan
Destination: Interface
Support] CP Issue
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 8:24 PM, Tim Dickson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Finally deploying captive portal at one of our new sites. But am coming
across a redirect issue I'm hoping you can shed some light on.
BACKGROUND:
I have 3 Wans setup - WAN, DSL, DSL2
I have 3 Lans
thanks!
-Tim
From: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 9:46 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] CP Issue
On 4/24/08, Tim Dickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, so I was wondering about that
So do I have to send it out default
Finally deploying captive portal at one of our new sites. But am coming
across a redirect issue I'm hoping you can shed some light on.
BACKGROUND:
I have 3 Wans setup - WAN, DSL, DSL2
I have 3 Lans setup - LAN, GUEST, PHONE
I have load balancing setup with DSL + DSL2 for the GUEST WAN
I have
Personally I have number 4 setup...
It took several days of playing, and to be honest I'm not sure what all was
the reason it finally worked.
But I have this setup:
WAN: Disable the userland FTP-Proxy application CHECKED
WAN2: Disable the userland FTP-Proxy application CHECKED
WAN3: Disable the
What kind of NAT are you using?
If it is port forward you'll have to forward the packets as well as adding
the rule to your Wan ruleset
If it is 1:1 it should work for you as long as then respond correctly within
your network
-tim
From: Ron Lemon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday,
They are all the firewall itself, yes.
But they are all different interfaces - keep that in mind when you get to
your rules.
Pfsense processes rules as they enter the interface, so once you are in
you can go anywhere
-Tim
From: Anil Garg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March
As a general rule you want to block all and then allow the services you
want.
This way you aren't left with any oops forgot to block that one mistakes.
But really, it's your firewall and you can manage it how you see fit!
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Why don't you guys use a different theme? Or customize your own?
Just curious...
I find the pfsense theme to be the easiest to jump around in - so I
customize that one with company logos...
But anyrate for those with small screens pfsense will definitely help you
out.
-Tim
-Original
What are the rules you are using on the WAN for traffic.
Keep in mind when you are defining the destination address it should be the
PRIVATE IP not the PUBLIC one
If you are getting the correct address on whatismyip then the NAT mapping is
fine. it is firewall rules that are messing you up.
by my isp. To answer your other question, the
wan rule is pass protocol:any port:any source:any destination:192.168.1.10
gateway:default
this rule is at the top of the list. (first processed)
i figured id go for simple and the block what i don't need after.
-Original Message-
From: Tim
Embedded images running on compact flash are not designed for the kinds of page
writes that would be involved with most packages.
This is to make the system as stable as possible.
Once SSD becomes a standard I'm sure they'll take a look at that, but for now -
the stability wouldn't be there.
As
this up
with a single interface? If the answer is yes, then I can do it simply enough.
If the answer is no, then I'm stuck with not having the hardware to do it in
the manner suggested.
Chris
-Original Message-
From: Tim Dickson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007
interface? If the answer is yes, then I can do it simply
enough. If the answer is no, then I'm stuck with not having the hardware to
do it in the manner suggested.
Chris
-Original Message-
From: Tim Dickson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 3:28 PM
The easiest way to do this is via DNS.
Enable a DNS on the inside that will translate your external IP's to
your internal IP's.
Although below would be ideal - I've never gotten it to work on PFSense,
and this works just fine.
-Tim
From: Justin Refice [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
Im a couple months off from trying this
http://www.abmx.com/1u-12inch-deep-mini-server-p-287.html
Im debating on whether to throw a 4 NIC intel in the PCI slot or try the 3
NIC card they can add (that doesnt use up the PCI slot either)
Itll use the re driver (its a Realtek RTL8110S) - and
And just for the sake of trying... give opendns.com a shot.
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: Rainer Duffner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 3:18 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Poor DNS performances and websurfing...
Am 27.09.2007 um
I am having a weird issue accessing fedex.com and I'm wondering if you can
help me determine if it is firewall related (or what it is).
Now almost all of our machines (except servers) are nat'ed to the same
external IP. (servers are 1:1 to their own public IP)
Half of our workstations can
-
From: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 11:28 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Strange issues with Fedex.com
On 8/1/07, Tim Dickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am having a weird issue accessing fedex.com and I'm wondering if you can
Ullrich:
On 8/1/07, Tim Dickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Plain Text noted(thanks, just wanted to get the pass image in
the rule
:) )
Recommened MTU is 1504, so 1500 should be fine ( I switched to
1400 just for
kicks to no avail)
FYI, this is ONLY for fedex.com too... Am I right
wrong. I've been entering
the IP address as Single addresses, ie /32 bit mask. Could it be
the hardware?
Jai
On 04/07/2007, at 11:26 AM, Tim Dickson wrote:
The IP's are in the same subnet right?
If you can use the ip's bypassing pfSense, then pfSense can use the
IP's.
Add them
) that they
will now work with proxy ARP?
I would assume it has to do with the kernel and not the network card.
On 03/07/2007, at 1:41 PM, Dave Cabot wrote:
How do I do that exactly? I thought ARP was self-discovery.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Tim Dickson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday
. What can we do to collect info in order to determine what
the
actual problem is? If it's the kernel, we need to know so a patch may
be
done.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Tim Dickson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 4:40 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: RE
You will need to set arp up because your firewall needs to say hey I'm
here... send these packets to me
After you do that you may need to power cycle your router to clear it's arp
cache.
It works great... use it on all my sites.
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: jai lamerton [mailto:[EMAIL
I'll throw in my 2 cents...
I've used PPTP and OpenVPN.
I like the ease of use of OpenVPN to the end user (via the openvpn GUI)
The manuals on pfSense.com walk you through it step by step... so setup
is easy for you as well.
Just click and go! is all the user has to do, and if their connection
If you are jammed for interfaces, and can spare the bandwidth... you can
try v-lans... that will give you a few more interfaces without adding
physical interfaces. Just a suggestion ;)
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007
I would add a fourth interface and make it a part of that new subnet.
Then you can bridge that interface to your DMZ.
That will allow pfSense to do the routing.
In your rules just make sure to make the gateway the second wan
interface.
(that's how I have it setup... and it works)
-Tim
PS... I
Wouldn't you want to bridge the two interfaces together? Just thinking
out loud here.
You could also set the interface DHCP on WLAN to hand a certain range of
address in the same subnet as your LAN, and then set rules accordingly.
Lastly... would it not work to open up the DHCP server in the
Also, keep your PPTP addresses in the same subnet as your file server.
If you don't, you'll have to go into some advanced routing...
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: Chris Buechler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 7:33 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense
Yes, just enable the port you want used to the local interface. ( a non
standard port is recommended)
-Tim
From: Anil garg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 2:04 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Support] Acess pfsense from WAN
Is there a way to access and
Well what part are you stuck on... you'll have a lot better luck asking
specifics than something so time consuming and general... there are a
million different combinations you could be looking for.
Work your way through, ask questions when you get stuck, and write the
docs as you go.
In the end
Unless I've missed an update along the way... 64bit is not supported.
-Tim
_
From: Abdul Aziz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 10:47 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Support] supported Hardware?
Dear Sir,
i'm trying to install
Probably a miss configuration in the bios then... it boots up fine in
the other machine?
Check the bios first...
Then you can pull all cards and peripherals and see if it boots.
If it boots put them cards and peripherals back in one by one till you
find the conflict.
-Tim
-Original
It will work... just means you missed something somewhere.
You also could setup everything on the harddrive on another machine and
then swap it over.
-tim
-Original Message-
From: Kyle Mott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 9:22 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
on your needs. You will handle
this with
rules on the LAN interface for outgoing connections. Because one of
the
connections is DHCP you will have to use this as a policy based dual
wan
setup as it is labeled in the docs.
Robert
On Friday 19 January 2007 12:17, Tim Dickson wrote:
Not quite
I'm not certain about the BSD users... (although it seems logical that
it would work)
I do know that a multiuser environment is being developed and tested and
eventually this will be a feature in PFSense. What release depends on
what bugs arise I'm sure :)
-Tim
-Original Message-
From:
And how can you expect help if you don't give any information to work
from!!!
As extremely brilliant as the developers are... they cannot read your
mind (or your problems, which seem abundant)
If you want help... be willing to work a bit, or be gone!
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: SDamron
Not sure about the first half... but if you are looking for a way to
reload the web interface remotely... (not even sure if that's what
you're asking) try PuTTy
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/
it gives you a remote console where you can reboot the machine, web, or
whatever you
Same thing happens to me once I switched to https on the webconfigurator.
just use http://yourfirewall:3000
you'll get in just fine :)
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: Bestul, Kurt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 11/9/2006 12:16 PM
To:
Actually I am struggling with this too. I never had an issue before,
but I noticed after going to 1.0 that public DNS is used.
I have turned DNS forwarder off, on, set the DNS servers on the General
tab to local DNS servers instead of public, and any other combination I
can think of... and the
and there.
Thanks guys,
-Tim
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob
Terhaar
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006
6:31 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support]
DHCP Question
On 10/30/06, Tim
Dickson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I
have a DCHP range
I changed my webGUI to HTTPS and moved the port to 8081
Now when I try to access NTOP I have to type it in manually
it tries to access it at 8081 for some reason.
If I force it to 3000 it works beautifully. Is there a way
to change that link in the files somewhere even if through
Uninstalled and Reinstalled the Package
put it still tries to open http:192.168.1.1:8081 instead of 192.168.1.1:3000
-Tim
From: Tim Dickson
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006
8:42 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: [pfSense Support] NTOP Port
I changed my webGUI to HTTPS
Been running 4 NICS for 8 months now... I am up to the 1.0 release
I am using the xl driver.
(there is actually a fifth that is not in use right now)
Might I recommend turning off everything you are not using in the BIOS
and then reinstalling.
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: Randy B
You guys crack me up! :)
Honestly, I'm surprised you have as much patience as you do!
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: Scott Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:46 AM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] Load balancer problem
On 9/19/06,
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
