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

    {Complete} Timebased Rules

    Completed Bounties
    10
    187
    141.7k
    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.
    • 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
                                    • H
                                      heiko
                                      last edited by

                                      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
                                      • S
                                        sullrich
                                        last edited by

                                        Nobody is creating a conflict.  I just cannot duplicate the problem..

                                        When I permit or deny ICMP traffic on the WAN interface it stops as it should.

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

                                          OK, then it is vmware problem, i think

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

                                            Do you speak german?  Please join #pfsenseDE on FreeNODE.

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