@jegr Maybe, but I didn't want the patch to also need to depend on having Filer installed, which most people don't (including myself...) That would require manually downloading the script and pasting it into Filer, setting the right bits, then installing System Patches, fetching the patch... lots of steps and more room for error.

@jimp said in How do I switch from 22.09 to 22.11?:

No firm ETA but we'll be posting about it

No sweat, rebasing isn't that easy peasy with quite a few fronts to cover (besides base OS, PHP etc.)

Looks like IPv6 is working now, there were problems on the ISP side.

@lostinignorance
@w0w said in IPv6 HE.net tunneling is broken on the latest snapshots:

Same on the Version 22.09.a.20220802.0600
Does anyone using HE tunnelbroker on the 22.09?

Now I am getting 22.09.a.20220802.0600 is available... OK 😑

@jimp
Hi Jim - thanks for the update. My only saving grace - it did work before! I probably put that in there on auto-pilot. Thanks

Not yet. The file seems to be missing from some installs. We are still digging into what's causing that.

Must have been a server side issue It appears that it started working again.

@stephenw10 said in unable to update to 22.11 pkg sources?:

FreeBSD: { enabled: no }

pfSense-core: {
url: "pkg+https://firmware.netgate.com/beta/packages/pfSense_plus-master_amd64-core",
mirror_type: "srv",
signature_type: "fingerprints",
fingerprints: "/usr/local/share/pfSense/keys/pkg",
enabled: yes
}

pfSense: {
url: "pkg+https://firmware.netgate.com/beta/packages/pfSense_plus-master_amd64-pfSense_plus_devel",
mirror_type: "srv",
signature_type: "fingerprints",
fingerprints: "/usr/local/share/pfSense/keys/pkg",
enabled: yes
}

Yeah our broken instances is missing the "plus" Part in the URI. Will adapt that and check again...

The snapshots are still tagged 22.09, right? Seeing: 22.09.a.20220728.0600 as the current one?

I can understand the thrill of upgrading to a new version with some improvements or new capabilities. However, asking Netgate to rush a release is not the way to go. If I recall right, Jim Thompson admitted they did this with the original WireGuard implementation in pfsense because there was so much excitement and demand for it. However, it had some significant issues that were later exposed. I personally had two SG-5100s that ended up dead in the water due to a kernel panic that was later confirmed to occur if certain conditions existed. It was a small inconvenience on my local router. It was a MAJOR problem on the router that is 7000 miles away. It was partly my fault; my previous OVPN or IPSec solutions worked well for years…I just got excited to use the awesome WireGuard implementation. Ouch. And Netgate took a very mean beating as a result of the issues its user base had. So, as long as your router is pushing packets and there are no unaddressed CVEs, be happy and let the process work.