Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    {Complete} Timebased Rules

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Completed Bounties
    187 Posts 10 Posters 156.2k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • H
      heiko
      last edited by

      Vielen Dank für die Übersetzung, Holger!
      Thanks for the translation, Holger!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • Y
        yoda715
        last edited by

        @hoba:

        @heiko:

        2.) I think the description could be a duty field - Screenshot
        Duty field? Can you describe this in more detail? How is this different than what is already there?
        At the Moment it doesn´t a duty field or my test was not right…., when you coded a duty field with a line break, i can already set a "speaking" description to that field. Then i can see directly what the admin means with this schedule.
        Also, do you have a better proposal? I´m up for it!

        He means it is a required field, so that you can't save the page with nothing filled in there. He wants to always see a description in the schedules overview for better readability/understanding what this schedule does or is intended for.

        Hmm, I don't particularly like making something required that isn't really necessary for the schedule to function. In my opinion making that field a requirement would be annoying.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • H
          heiko
          last edited by

          Hello Scott,
          i don´t think so…., but it is not really fundamental, so you must not change this field!!

          At the Moment i cannot test the build, because i think the snapshot server is down?
          Greetings
          Heiko

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • H
            heiko
            last edited by

            Hello,
            i need the snapshot server to test the build, then we will see if the project is finished.
            Greetings
            heiko

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • S
              sullrich
              last edited by

              Server is down, we're working on it.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • H
                heiko
                last edited by

                I´m waiting and waiting, so i can test snort….. ;D

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • H
                  heiko
                  last edited by

                  we are Online! i will download and test the latest snapshot, i will be post the outcomes…

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • Y
                    yoda715
                    last edited by

                    All known bugs are knocked out using latest snapshot. Please test latest snapshot. This latest snapshot should complete time based rules if it meets approval.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • H
                      heiko
                      last edited by

                      Hello Scott´s,

                      first, i have a "big problem" with testing it completely out. Here the outcomes. Take a look at the Screenshots.

                      1.) The Filter reload ist not really working here. I created an icmp-rule to ping the wan-interface. OK, so i disabled this without having a schedule and the ping replys and replys and so on….... It is difficult to test the schedule-logic, cron, resettings states and so on if the filter reloading are not completely working without schedules. Even if i delete the rule, the ping replys and replys, i wait after the deletion one hour, the ping replys....New ping-sessions are also established. Hmmm? I don´t know.

                      Sorry! Please duplicate!

                      2.) Can you implement the extension to "Console-menu"?? It would be very nice.

                      3.) a line break also in the configured range would be helpful --> Screenshot
                      ;D - it´s finished

                      4.) the Description of the "schedule name" is not right, "-;_" kicks me out when i fill this in..
                      ;D -it´s finished

                      5.) Upps, when i edit a saved schedule and change the name for example from "test123" to "test12345", all rules with the schedule "test123" are not switching to "test12345" but to "none" --    intended Huh
                      ;D -it´s finished , cool solution

                      6.) The "schedule name" field is very long, so look at the screenshot, maybe a little bit shorter, a field definition would be good.
                      ??? Not complete, take a look at the screenshot -- Sorry

                      7.) Screenshot ; edit a saved range without saving the changes, edit then the next range, so the first one is down the drain, it would be better, i think, when only one range at a time can be modified.
                      ;D -it´s finished

                      8.) Another problem i think --> see Screenshot ssh.jpg- I have to created a blocking rule like ssh at the top. Without a rule schedule it works fine. Now i create a time range - today 16:45 - to 17:00 -. The time is 16:20 when i put the schedule to the rule. Saved, but nothing happens... On 16:40 i cannot established a ssh session. The Blocking rule i think is only active betwen the timerange, so the default lan rule is active, but i can´t access. The webgui anti-lockout checkbox is active. The "not" operator are not used in this rule.

                      • I can test it out, when the filter reloading and states resetting are OK, sorry

                      Please duplicate this behaviour to number 1 and i will retest as soon as possible

                      The "knock-out" is delayed :)

                      Greetings
                      heiko

                      button_to_near1.jpg
                      button_to_near2.jpg
                      button_to_near2.jpg_thumb
                      great_logic_thanks.jpg
                      great_logic_thanks.jpg_thumb
                      icmp_test_with_deactivate_rules.jpg
                      icmp_test_with_deactivate_rules.jpg_thumb
                      range_description_too_long.jpg
                      range_description_too_long.jpg_thumb
                      schedules_too_long_buttons.jpg
                      schedules_too_long_buttons.jpg_thumb

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • S
                        sullrich
                        last edited by

                        #1 Sorry, I do not understand this at all.  You are saying that ICMP is not being blocked even without a schedule?

                        In terms of the description boxes, enter a space.  Its NOT normal for someone to enter sdvjkhsdgkjhsdgkhsdkjdgsh as a description.

                        We'll look into the other nit-picks.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • H
                          heiko
                          last edited by

                          Hello Scott,
                          what is normal? We can finished it, but in my opinion a test is an extreme test.
                          Change it or leave it! Your decision!!!

                          Please test blocking rules without schedules. I´am confused of this.

                          Heiko

                          Sorry!!

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • S
                            sullrich
                            last edited by

                            I don't understand the problem so it is going to be hard to test.  Can you please explain #1 again.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • H
                              heiko
                              last edited by

                              Scott,
                              it is a very simple test.

                              My first test: I create a rule with icmp path to the wan!
                              2.) i ping- all is OK
                              3.) i disable the rule, and the ping replys
                              4.) i delete the rule, and the ping replys
                              5.) after the delete of the "one" rule, new ping replys and replys

                              So, before i test a rule with a schedule, at first a i test the normal behaviour….

                              Please duplicate!

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • S
                                sullrich
                                last edited by

                                I cannot duplicate this.  The firewall works as it should without schedules, in fact, we didn't modify the PF rules at all so if an item does not have a schedule then nothing has changed on the backend.

                                If you are speaking of a rule having an issue with a schedule please run ipfw show from the shell and show what the rules look like.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • H
                                  heiko
                                  last edited by

                                  I will test it, i´am disappointed

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • S
                                    sullrich
                                    last edited by

                                    Why are you disappointed?

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • H
                                      heiko
                                      last edited by

                                      no comment, i will test it

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • S
                                        sullrich
                                        last edited by

                                        I think our language barriers are getting in the way.  Is there someone out there that can help translate?

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • H
                                          heiko
                                          last edited by

                                          Scott,
                                          i think we are finished the project.
                                          Thank you for the the great coding.
                                          heiko

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • S
                                            sullrich
                                            last edited by

                                            I am confused, so everything works okay?

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.