I've just upgraded to 26.1.x (from 25.7) and the upgrade was flawless. Thanks.
Then I checked my DNAT rules (formerly known as port forwarding) and I was shocked that rules were missing. Turns out that they were not missing, but the rules are presented in a fixed sized window (I don't know the term, maybe it's called a container or div - I am not a GUI person) and I had to scroll within that little window to see all my rules.
Previously the window (conainer or whatever) adjusted its size depending on the number of entries you wanted to see (50, 100, ..., All). Now you have 2 separate scroll areas, which is extremly inconvenient. See screenshot.
Is this a bug or a deliberate design decision? If it is the latter, please reconsider and also please explain how this is supposed to be better than it was before.
The KEA DHCP Server webGUI parts have something similar and I am not sure what to think of it yet either...
At least it's a bit better than the ISC DHCP Server webGUI was were you had to scroll over the Settings to get to the Static DHCP Mappings part each time :)
Quote from: nero355 on March 05, 2026, 02:36:23 PMAt least it's a bit better than the ISC DHCP Server webGUI was were you had to scroll over the Settings to get to the Static DHCP Mappings part each time :)
This can easily be solved by adding a link (reference within the same page) at the top to jump to the static mappings.
But the fact that the current UI now has 2 scroll areas (and scrolling depends on where your mouse pointer is), is not very user friendly. Especially when I can choose the number of rules to show. This is then basically useless, if the scroll area always stays the same.
Still hoping for an answer to my question:
Is this a bug or a deliberate design decision? If it is the latter, please reconsider and also please explain how this is supposed to be better than it was before.
It's a deliberate design choice.
Quote from: tessus on March 05, 2026, 09:34:59 PMThis can easily be solved by adding a link (reference within the same page) at the top to jump to the static mappings.
I was thinking about a seperate sub-menu on the left, but since ISC DHCP Server is EOL officially it's not gonna happen...
Quote from: Monviech (Cedrik) on March 05, 2026, 10:29:05 PMIt's a deliberate design choice.
With or without a chance that it might get a re-design/small fix in the future ??
Quote from: Monviech (Cedrik) on March 05, 2026, 10:29:05 PMIt's a deliberate design choice.
Which begs the question:
how is this supposed to be better than it was before? (there must be a reason for the design choice. As mentioned before, it renders the number of rules to display pretty much useless now.)
If you want to complain please do so on github.
Its most likely decided here
https://github.com/opnsense/core/blob/43c933d6a67cac11841ddc9803565bb279f13219/src/opnsense/www/js/opnsense_bootgrid.js#L772
Please be constructive, "better" is always very individual.
I wrote a small haiku-ish poem for you.
Complaints, here before
Complaints, now 20-20
forever fruits of work
Cheers,
Franco
Quote from: Monviech (Cedrik) on March 06, 2026, 06:23:20 AMIf you want to complain please do so on github.
I was asking a question, and asking the people, who decided on that new design, why it is better is constructive. There must have been a thought process, which I don't understand but want to. If you think this is a complaint, it is not. Not yet, I usually don't complain, but I want to understand why things are the way they are. It is a subjective opinion. I love OPNsense, but dislike the new design with the heat of a thousand suns.
However, maybe I don't understand why the new design was deliberate. Guess what? This is why I asked the question. And then maybe I will think differently.
Also, if it is not better in the eyes of the people who are responsible for this, why was it done in the first place? So don't get me wrong, they must have thought it is better, they didn't just roll a dice, did they? So for them the new design was better, subjective or not. I still want to know what it was exactly.
I have linked the code where there is a comment about the new library used (tabulator) having some challenges with this resizing.
The way you initially wrote with bold text and suggestive questions made it look like you were baiting for an argument.
If something should be fixed or re-explored it would be best to discuss it on github so it can be tracked properly.
The question that bugs me the most - why in *any* UI replicate UI elements the browser already brings? The browser got a dynamically resizable canvas and it's got scroll bars. It's got back and forward buttons. Etc.
The expectation of anyone using a web site or web UI is for these elements to be the main ones to interact with.
Just render an effin' table. And place all "action" buttons at the top. If I need to scroll, I'll scroll. That's what the browser scroll bar is for.
But why create another limited canvas with its own scroll bar outside of the browser's (and the user's!) control? I really do not get it. Stick to the established paradigms of how the web works.
Of course I am not that old fashioned to argue against e.g. pagination. But if at the top I select "show me 50 entries per page" there is absolutely no reason not to just render a table with 50 lines and let the browser and me handle it.
My 2 ct.
The browser renders all scroll bars you can see :)
Quote from: Monviech (Cedrik) on March 06, 2026, 09:54:27 PMThe browser renders all scroll bars you can see :)
You know what I mean.
I understand your point but I already referred to the right channel for this feedback, which is an issue on github.
We are constantly working on improving the user experience with the new tabulator library.
Quote from: Monviech (Cedrik) on March 06, 2026, 10:09:26 PMWe are constantly working on improving the user experience with the new tabulator library.
I absolutely appreciate the effort put into the MVC refactoring and the unification of UI elements throughout all of the areas.
I hope there will be attention to detail and dedication to quality left once you are done with the first "sweep". The inconsistency of separate apply actions - yes or no? And the positions of central action buttons is not just mildly annoying. Getting these right at some point in the future would in my opinion distinguish an ok product from a great product.
OPNsense is great. Keep up the good work. Thank you!
Quote from: Monviech (Cedrik) on March 06, 2026, 09:39:04 PMI have linked the code where there is a comment about the new library used (tabulator) having some challenges with this resizing.
Thank you. I had an appointment this afternoon and I wasn't able to read up on it. I only saw the referenced issue in the comment, but need more time to look into it, which I will do this evening.
So, why didn't someone answer with:
it was a workaround for a bug or limitation. Please open a github issue for further discussions. On one side I can certainly understand this, but there might be fixes or better libraries in the future. (As I mentioned before, I have to read up on it and maybe open an issue with the tabulator project.)
I like github, so I don't have a problem with it. But questions are usually closed in gh trackers referencing a forum or some other channel.
Which is why I asked my question in this forum (as a starting point). I certainly have no problem to move it over to gh. But in that case, please state in which repo, and other info: issue, discussion, ...
Quote from: Monviech (Cedrik) on March 06, 2026, 09:39:04 PMThe way you initially wrote with bold text and suggestive questions made it look like you were baiting for an argument.
Initially I did not write in bold. I wrote in bold to emphasize my unanswered questions. People tend not to answer questions, but rather give unrelated statements. This is not an OPNsense forum problem, but apparently how communication now works. 20 years ago, you asked a question and you got an answer to that exact question.
These days you get comments, deflection, part of an answer that could have been derived if all of it had been answered, or an answer that might not have anything to do with the question that was asked.
The answer "it was a deliberate design choice" by itself is utterly useless unless I am told why.
I was just trying to emphasize the question and I believe that is what bold is for. To emphasize text. I did not use all CAPS, btw.
Quote from: Patrick M. Hausen on March 06, 2026, 09:50:56 PMBut if at the top I select "show me 50 entries per page" there is absolutely no reason not to just render a table with 50 lines and let the browser and me handle it.
Thank you, this was exactly my point as well.
Quote from: Monviech (Cedrik) on March 06, 2026, 10:09:26 PMWe are constantly working on improving the user experience with the new tabulator library.
My point is that the user experience hasn't been improved in this case. At least not for me. For me the experience got worse in this specific case. Otherwise I wouldn't have brought it up. Please check my first post again. I mentioned that I missed rules because of this. I did not use profanity, nor did I attack anyone. I voiced an opinion. That's all. And apparently I am not alone with my opinion.
I will read up on the tabulator issue, but I am not a GUI person, which means I will be most likely over my head with this one.
So maybe there are options or ways to get back the old behavior even with the new library. If not, the new libary should fix this problem to actually improve the user experience. Otherwise you could just remove the "number-of-rules" button and the pagination functionality, since those things are pretty much useless now.
Apart from all that I am very happy with OPNsense. I am not someone to complain without reason and I actually still haven't complained yet. I mentioned that the user experience is worse for me. A complaint is filed, if the other party did something wrong. But I don't think that anybody did anything wrong in this case. A combination of circumstances led to an unfavorable result and I can't complain about something like this.
It looks like this topic applies to other parts of the webGUI too and at least one person found a nice workaround for it : https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?msg=262103
Basically edit the CSS so the height is at least 2000 pixels :)
While I do not dislike the "Tabbed webGUI" maybe something like this that I posted a long time ago would be the better option : https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?topic=50279.msg256063#msg256063
This way you will always have the total height of the webpage available for all the data and scrolling is also limited to just the data shown!
Quote from: nero355 on March 07, 2026, 03:02:17 PMIt looks like this topic applies to other parts of the webGUI too and at least one person found a nice workaround for it : https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?msg=262103 (https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?msg=262103)
Basically edit the CSS so the height is at least 2000 pixels :)
Awesome, thank you for this. I converted that Tampermonkey script into a Stylus User Style and it works nicely.
I'm curious to know what browser engines and screen resolutions are common.
My main setup is Firefox and the primary display is 2560x1440. I don't run any Chrome based browsers, so am not sure if you all are seeing the same as me.
The issue I have is mostly with grid resizing and horizontal space. I can get into a state where the grid columns overlap and obscure each other, requiring a horizontal scroll in addition to vertical. All I need to do to get into this state is collapse the left-hand OPNsense menu, resize the grid, and then expand the menu again. When the grid columns are obscured I cannot get them to correct themselves.
Pressing the grid reset button has no effect. That's another issue- it only works sometimes.
The kicker is that (at least in Firefox) the horizontal scroll bar is barely visible and you don't really realize you have the option to scroll. I only realized it by accident because my mouse has a horizontal scroll wheel that I activated.
Quote from: tessus on March 08, 2026, 12:22:38 AMQuote from: nero355 on March 07, 2026, 03:02:17 PMIt looks like this topic applies to other parts of the webGUI too and at least one person found a nice workaround for it : https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?msg=262103 (https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?msg=262103)
Basically edit the CSS so the height is at least 2000 pixels :)
Awesome, thank you for this. I converted that Tampermonkey script into a Stylus User Style and it works nicely.
You are welcome!
But all kudos go to the guy who posted it in that topic IMHO ;)
Quote from: OPNenthu on March 08, 2026, 12:31:32 AMI'm curious to know what browser engines and screen resolutions are common.
My main setup is Firefox and the primary display is 2560x1440. I don't run any Chrome based browsers, so am not sure if you all are seeing the same as me.
Let's be honest :
It would be weird if the whole webGUI did not fit on your 2560x1440 and I am guessing 27 inch screen ?!
However my 24 inch 1920x1200 monitor struggles from time to time as can be seen in these screenshots that I took a while ago : https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?topic=9245.msg259581#msg259581
I seriously had to ZOOM OUT (and A LOT too!) for some of them !! :'(
The reason I am mentioning the monitor size is the fact that these combinations probably don't need any kind of scaling for most people so everything is using 1:1 pixelmapping.
Quote from: nero355 on March 08, 2026, 02:22:27 AMIt would be weird if the whole webGUI did not fit on your 2560x1440 and I am guessing 27 inch screen ?!
There is a bug with the grid's ability to resize regardless.
Quote from: nero355 on March 08, 2026, 02:22:27 AMHowever my 24 inch 1920x1200 monitor struggles from time to time
As does my secondary monitor and my laptop even more so :P
TBH, I was intrigued when I saw a comment from franco the other day that OPNsense supports mobile. I never even imagined trying...
Quote from: OPNenthu on March 08, 2026, 02:33:14 AMTBH, I was intrigued when I saw a comment from franco the other day that OPNsense supports mobile. I never even imagined trying..
I have used it once to tell a couple of guys to "bugger off" in a friendly way when they started asking a very stupid question :
"Now that you no longer have any UniFi Router how do you update it from your phone ?"#FacePalm...For some people it's like their webbrowser died the same day that they discovered stupid apps for every damn simple basic thing! LOL!
And the actual joke is that I have never used any kind of UniFi related app! ^_^