Re: [pfSense Support] outbound nat on pppoe

2006-02-27 Thread Bill Marquette
Wow, I ran that code for the better part of a year and didn't discover that :-/ I do recall having a /29 and making use of adv. outbound NAT though, but come to think of it, I wanted CARP so delegated PPPOE termination to the modem. Hmmm...Just to clarify (it's early and I haven't looked at the

[pfSense Support] system lockup

2006-02-27 Thread Vivek Khera
I've been running pfSense since about last September or so. Works great. Last week I upgraded to the 2-20-06 test release from the prior test release. FTP on my 1:1 NAT box works now, which is great! However, yesterday afternoon, the box just froze. Nothing on console, network not

Re: [pfSense Support] system lockup

2006-02-27 Thread Vivek Khera
On Feb 27, 2006, at 11:25 AM, Scott Ullrich wrote: Not too sure on this one, we may need to wait a little longer for RELENG_6 to be finished before we can really do anything. In the meantime it would be helpful if we could replicate the problem with a real FreeBSD install. I'm not sure how

Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper - VoIP

2006-02-27 Thread Robert Goley
I will retest with Beta2. I had the same results that John reported with Vonage lines. I only had to test it with one of the lines. Robert On Sat, 2006-02-25 at 17:18 -0600, Bill Marquette wrote: Thanks for the update. I just spent a number of hours on the shaper and think I found the

Re: [pfSense Support] system lockup

2006-02-27 Thread Scott Ullrich
If you experience the problem again, I'll create a custom image for you with debugging support. On 2/27/06, Vivek Khera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 27, 2006, at 11:25 AM, Scott Ullrich wrote: Not too sure on this one, we may need to wait a little longer for RELENG_6 to be finished

Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper - VoIP

2006-02-27 Thread Bill Marquette
On 2/27/06, Robert Goley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I will retest with Beta2. I had the same results that John reported with Vonage lines. I only had to test it with one of the lines. Robert Thanks...the workarounds kinda suck IMO and we're still seeing issues on WRAPs (but not all of

RE: [pfSense Support] outbound nat on pppoe

2006-02-27 Thread alan walters
Physhical interface. Like redirect lan to squid server. Redirect all pppoe_clients to squid server -Original Message- From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 27 February 2006 15:00 To: support@pfsense.com Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] outbound nat on pppoe Wow, I ran that

Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper - VoIP

2006-02-27 Thread Robert Goley
I am running the PC version installed to a HD. I have 3 3com 3c905 cards(bc's I think). It is a P II 450 with a 10 GB IDE drive. It has over 3??MB of RAM. I was running 2-19-06 and 2-19-06 with the latest update tarball applied. Robert On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 13:39 -0600, Bill Marquette wrote:

Re: [pfSense Support] outbound nat on pppoe

2006-02-27 Thread Bill Marquette
Ahhh, you run the PPPOE server right? How about a port forward? That's all the auto-redirect on lan to squid does. We should probably make this part of the squid package and have an interface selection for which interfaces to redirect. --Bill On 2/27/06, alan walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

RE: [pfSense Support] outbound nat on pppoe

2006-02-27 Thread alan walters
Something similar. But there is a tab fire pppoe firewall rules. So something is already done here. Bu I think that is just a subnet thing. I think we would need something at interface level to make to portforward work outbound. I will checkout rules.debug and give some feedback. -Original

RE: [pfSense Support] outbound nat on pppoe

2006-02-27 Thread alan walters
Exactly as you described would have to add an rdr rule for each NG interface would apply to the ftp proxy it seems. A problem I outlined on forums the other day. Practically possible? because it sort of limits pppoe server if it is not. -Original Message- From: Bill Marquette

Re: [pfSense Support] Traffic Shaper - VoIP

2006-02-27 Thread Bill Marquette
On 2/27/06, Charles Sprickman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since I was bitching about Vonage, I'll be sure to grab the latest snapshot and see what happens. Of note, I know that we're still not getting stuff in the right queues - I've been sidetracked with this much larger issue. So, don't be