{Complete} Timebased Rules

heiko · 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

hoba · 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.

heiko · Mar 30, 2007, 7:00 AM

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

yoda715 · 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.

heiko · 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

heiko · 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

sullrich · Mar 30, 2007, 6:20 PM

Server is down, we're working on it.

heiko · Mar 30, 2007, 6:26 PM

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

heiko · Mar 30, 2007, 8:40 PM

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

yoda715 · 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.

heiko · Mar 31, 2007, 8:20 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

sullrich · 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.

heiko · Mar 31, 2007, 9:16 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!!

sullrich · 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.

heiko · 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!

sullrich · 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.

heiko · Mar 31, 2007, 9:42 PM

I will test it, i´am disappointed

sullrich · Mar 31, 2007, 9:51 PM

Why are you disappointed?

heiko · Mar 31, 2007, 9:53 PM

no comment, i will test it

sullrich · Mar 31, 2007, 9:53 PM

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