OPNsense Forum

English Forums => Documentation and Translation => Topic started by: passeri on June 02, 2023, 12:36:27 pm

Title: Alias spamhaus - Interface does not accord with documentation
Post by: passeri on June 02, 2023, 12:36:27 pm
In the documentation for configuration of spamhaus, it says (as shown in the attachment to this post) to complete Name, Description, Type and Host(s).

I go to Firewall:Aliases

I see no "Add new alias button at top right" as described in the documentation, but there is a "+" at bottom right hinted "Add" so I use that.

On the page which comes up, I fill in Name, Type and Description exactly as specified. However, there is no field called "Hosts", so where does one fill in the required "https://www.spamhaus.org/drop/drop.txt"?

I can create the alias without adding Hosts, but what usefully follows from that?

Any help with setting this up will be appreciated.
Title: Re: Alias spamhaus - Interface does not accord with documentation
Post by: cookiemonster on June 02, 2023, 01:29:31 pm
Use type url list instead of hosts. Hosts is when you add specific host in the field. Instead you are using a list of them, to be downloaded from that url.
Title: Re: Alias spamhaus - Interface does not accord with documentation
Post by: passeri on June 03, 2023, 02:17:29 am
Thank you for your response, cookiemonster. Unfortunately, it does not reflect what I am seeing on screen so I shall try to clarify.

When you say to "use url list instead of hosts" I take it you refer to the screen item "Type", a drop-down list which is the third item in the screen "Firewall -> Aliases -> Add ->". I am not selecting "Hosts" but "URL Table (IPs)" exactly as described in the documentation here: https://docs.opnsense.org/manual/how-tos/edrop.html and which appears to be what you are suggesting. At that point, there is nowhere to complete a "Hosts" field which is supposed to be available for entering the spamhaus url, as shown in the documentation I linked.

There seems to be a mismatch with the documentation or else the suggested entry point for this task is incorrect.
Title: Re: Alias spamhaus - Interface does not accord with documentation
Post by: cookiemonster on June 03, 2023, 10:56:58 pm
Ah yes, you are right. The documentation seems to need an update.
You have probably worked it out now but for this you indeed use "url table" type and enter the url in the "content" field.
Title: Re: Alias spamhaus - Interface does not accord with documentation
Post by: tiermutter on June 03, 2023, 11:13:24 pm
Docs are often criticized due to outdated or incomplete descriptions.

Maybe wrong place to ask for, but how can I contribute and edit docs (assuming I can free up the time needed)?
Title: Re: Alias spamhaus - Interface does not accord with documentation
Post by: cookiemonster on June 03, 2023, 11:35:08 pm
https://docs.opnsense.org/contribute.html#documentation-wiki-articles

I've been meaning to figure out how to do the pull request method for my own education but I never manage to find the time.
Title: Re: Alias spamhaus - Interface does not accord with documentation
Post by: tiermutter on June 04, 2023, 12:52:45 am
Thank you!
My way would be "word document with embedded images (if any)" as I am used to write such articles to draft in Word. It's easy for me to write howto's, I've done that very often... but always in German, except https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?topic=31941.0.
Working on the docs would be a challenge for me....
Title: Re: Alias spamhaus - Interface does not accord with documentation
Post by: passeri on June 04, 2023, 02:05:06 am
Thanks cookiemonster, that is it. I had not yet ventured to try that myself for a couple of reasons. I am not familiar enough with OPNsense to be relaxed with it yet it is my primary firewall so I tend not to rush to experiment. Secondly, it makes sense to wait a couple of answer cycles; someone is almost bound to have been there before. Experimenting was pencilled in for later today (I am likely on the other side of the planet from you) but not now needed.

I had a look at the pull request process for documentation. Dare I say it could be better documented for people quite unfamiliar with it?  :)  Good documentation is also an area of interest to me, having seen a couple of things which might be better clarified without weighing down the docs with verbiage. I may get to that also, in a couple of months after some other things.

Thank you both for your contributions. A sane forum goes a long way.