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

{Complete} Timebased Rules

Completed Bounties
10
187
141.5k
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.
  • Y
    yoda715
    last edited by Mar 29, 2007, 8:13 PM Mar 29, 2007, 8:03 PM

    @heiko:

    1.) how it works when schedules with time overlaps exists?

    Every 15 minutes all schedules are re-evaluated. If two schedules overlap it should work continuously and not disturb each other.

    @heiko:

    2.) a line break also in the configured range would be helpful –> Screenshot

    I'm working on this

    @heiko:

    3.) The Description of the "schedule name" is not right, "-;_" kicks me out when i fill this in..

    This has been corrected. Valid names are a-z, A-Z and 0-9

    @heiko:

    4.) 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?

    @heiko:

    5.) "Grimbelfix" when edit/save/edit is OK - it runs

    Good to hear :)

    @heiko:

    6.) 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 ???

    Oops. Fixed.

    @heiko:

    7.) it would be fine, when the console menü receives a number with, for  example, "deleting all schedules on rule", maybe,maybe

    Can you elaborate some more on this?

    @heiko:

    8.) how is the actual condition of cron, timedelay between reloading?

    Time delay should be around 30 secs at most, depending on the speed and load of your pfsense box.

    @heiko:

    9.) The "schedule name" field is very long, so look at the screenshot, maybe a little bit shorter, a field definition would be good.

    Fixed.

    @heiko:

    10.) 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.

    Oops, thought I did this already. Done

    @heiko:

    11.) 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.

    Update to the latest snapshot in 2 hours. This should be fixed. Retest and let us know.

    @heiko:

    I not known, which timebased-rule-system is better than pfsense´s….., no one, i think

    I think its fair to say We have the best schedule system now :)

    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
    • H
      heiko
      last edited by Mar 29, 2007, 10:06 PM Mar 29, 2007, 9:44 PM

      Ok, i will test the next snapshot, but tommorow…..

      1.) 7.) it would be fine, when the console menü receives a number with, for  example, "deleting all schedules on rule", maybe,maybe

      Can you elaborate some more on this?

      i think, with a complex time based rulesystem, i can kick me out…., then i can reset all with the console menue, but this is not very comfortable, so i must reset , config restore and other things. A very big time lost...

      I think, a number with the code behind " delete all schedules on rules" brings all rules up and i needn´t a restore or anything would be helpful.

      Do you have a better proposal?

      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!

      I will test the other points in the morning, and post the outcomes….

      Thank you very much!
      Heiko

      duty-field.jpg
      duty-field.jpg_thumb

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • H
        hoba
        last edited by Mar 30, 2007, 6:09 AM

        @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.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • H
          heiko
          last edited by Mar 30, 2007, 7:00 AM

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

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • Y
            yoda715
            last edited by Mar 30, 2007, 9:54 AM

            @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 Mar 30, 2007, 10:46 AM

              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 Mar 30, 2007, 6:02 PM

                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 Mar 30, 2007, 6:20 PM

                  Server is down, we're working on it.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • H
                    heiko
                    last edited by Mar 30, 2007, 6:26 PM

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

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • H
                      heiko
                      last edited by Mar 30, 2007, 8:40 PM

                      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 Mar 31, 2007, 9:35 AM

                        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 Mar 31, 2007, 8:20 PM Mar 31, 2007, 12:46 PM

                          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 Mar 31, 2007, 8:35 PM

                            #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 Mar 31, 2007, 9:16 PM Mar 31, 2007, 9:09 PM

                              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 Mar 31, 2007, 9:21 PM

                                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 Mar 31, 2007, 9:31 PM

                                  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 Mar 31, 2007, 9:36 PM

                                    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 Mar 31, 2007, 9:42 PM

                                      I will test it, i´am disappointed

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • S
                                        sullrich
                                        last edited by Mar 31, 2007, 9:51 PM

                                        Why are you disappointed?

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • H
                                          heiko
                                          last edited by Mar 31, 2007, 9:53 PM

                                          no comment, i will test it

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          134 out of 187
                                          • First post
                                            134/187
                                            Last post
                                          Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.