$50 for tftp-server-name DHCP option
-
Is this going to be in the next GUI too?
-
-
I think many many people would use a feature such as this. IP phones are becoming more and more popular and the easiest way to configure a network of them is with the tftp DHCP option. I know this option would be used more than some of the other more specialized options that are already in pfsense. I truely hope more people voice their need for this feature and you reconsider adding it to the gui.
-
I think many many people would use a feature such as this. IP phones are becoming more and more popular and the easiest way to configure a network of them is with the tftp DHCP option. I know this option would be used more than some of the other more specialized options that are already in pfsense. I truely hope more people voice their need for this feature and you reconsider adding it to the gui.
I'll meet you half way. You do the GUI work and I'll commit.
-
The attached diff (against CVS HEAD) contains some GUI related mods as requested by keefe007.
-
0KB
-
-
As an installer of Asterisk PBX systems, the ability to push different DHCP options such as boot server, NTP server, and time offset, are absolute requirements in choosing a firewall/DHCP server. Without means of providing this function to DHCP clients such as IP phones, the usefullness of PFSense is greatly diminished. Its ok for now to be able to add them to a config file but a long term solution to provide this functionality is crucial to the success of PFSense within the IP PBX market.
-Kerry
-
As an installer of Asterisk PBX systems, the ability to push different DHCP options such as boot server, NTP server, and time offset, are absolute requirements in choosing a firewall/DHCP server. Without means of providing this function to DHCP clients such as IP phones, the usefullness of PFSense is greatly diminished. Its ok for now to be able to add them to a config file but a long term solution to provide this functionality is crucial to the success of PFSense within the IP PBX market.
-Kerry
agree 100%!
for asterisk support alone, a more flexible DHCP server is a killer feature.DHCP server interface works really well in IPCOP, better then any other i've seen.
-
I agree with the last two posts :)
-
Weird thought, make it available as a advanced option and hide it behind a advanced button.
That appears to work really well for current code in RELENG_1
-
Was there ever a final resolution on this? If so, what is the proper format for the config.xml & services.inc file. I tried all the variations I could find, none seemed to work with my cisco phones.
-
I would like to claim the bounty.
It's added to both RELENG_1 and HEAD.
It should be on the services_dhcp.php page.
It will be hidden behind a "advanced" button.
seth.mos@xs4all.nl for paypal -
Hello,
I just completed a search for "option 66" to see if PFSense supported it and came upon this post.
I too would use this for an Asterisk system.
What is the status of this initiative ? Is anyone else looking for this ? Is anyone using this now ?
TIA.
-
This has been commited to -HEAD.
I'm still a little unsure of your release processes, when will a commit to HEAD (from May 2006) make it into a snapshot, or an actual release?
I had a look in the code from 1.2-BETA-1-TESTING-SNAPSHOT-06-04-2007 but its not in there.
Regards
Ben
-
AFAIK, there is no set schedule for HEAD features getting into release.
However, it should have hit RELENG_1. Perhaps no one ponied up the bounty…
@databeestje:I would like to claim the bounty.
It's added to both RELENG_1 and HEAD.
It should be on the services_dhcp.php page.
It will be hidden behind a "advanced" button.
seth.mos@xs4all.nl for paypal -
AFAIK, there is no set schedule for HEAD features getting into release.
However, it should have hit RELENG_1. Perhaps no one ponied up the bounty…That bit by databeestje confused me a bit because the bounty had already been claimed previously :
This bounty has been claimed by Daniel S. Haischt, who sent us some patched files, from which we were able to create a modification with a more minimal impact.
Regards
Ben
-
My understanding was that DSH was no longer coding for the project. See here:
http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,2824.msg22987.html#msg22987
I think that's why Seth was completing the work. -
My understanding was that DSH was no longer coding for the project. See here:
http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,2824.msg22987.html#msg22987
I think that's why Seth was completing the work.@dotdash
Don't spread false rumors. And yes the bounty was already claimed and I am not sure whether the bounty author is willing to pay twice.Cheers
Daniel S. Haischt -
Sorry, meant no offense. Was just trying to figure out where this went, as the thread is a bit confusing. It says it was added to release, but doesn't appear in recent snapshots. I was just speculating as to why it looked like there had been multiple people working on this. Again, sorry that my wild speculation was off-base.
Re-reading it does say clearly that the bounty was claimed and the changes were added to head.
