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

{Complete} Timebased Rules

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Completed Bounties
187 Posts 10 Posters 163.4k 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.
  • Y Offline
    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 Offline
      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 Offline
        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 Offline
          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 Offline
            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 Offline
              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 Offline
                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 Offline
                  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 Offline
                    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 Offline
                      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 Offline
                        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 Offline
                          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 Offline
                            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 Offline
                              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 Offline
                                sullrich
                                last edited by Mar 31, 2007, 9:51 PM

                                Why are you disappointed?

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

                                  no comment, i will test it

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

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • H Offline
                                      heiko
                                      last edited by Mar 31, 2007, 9:59 PM

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

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • S Offline
                                        sullrich
                                        last edited by Mar 31, 2007, 9:59 PM

                                        I am confused, so everything works okay?

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • H Offline
                                          heiko
                                          last edited by Mar 31, 2007, 10:05 PM

                                          No, i think it is not working, but you work very well, but i want not a conflict..

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          138 out of 187
                                          • First post
                                            138/187
                                            Last post
                                          Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.
                                            This community forum collects and processes your personal information.
                                            consent.not_received