Recent posts

#21

General Discussion / Re: Why I am retiring from con...

Last post by franco - Today at 05:33:32 PM

I suppose you are right.  I can only give my outside perspective here.  There's definitely a structural issue at play here that makes inclusion and mutual respect wishes on a paper more than anything that is lived by.  I believe we can all agree on a technical patch that goes throw a review process.  FreeBSD has all the tools and interested people to do it.  The unspoken exercised culture, however, is one of lack of accountability and likely hard to overcome to be more goal oriented, open and collaborative.  Things that nobody else cares about are not tended to even if contributions exist.  This is where FreeBSD loses traction that would be an easy win.

Now at least some of my ports found no delay in maintainership which I find good and strange at the same time as if this behaviour fixes a structural problem the ports were having.  I hope that incentive lasts, yet ports already start falling behind with CVEs and upstream releases out in the wild.  Very happy that's not the case for our users, because there is an established process: test -> commit -> ship -> enjoy  :)


Cheers,
Franco

#22

25.7, 25.10 Series / Re: in dnsmasq dhcp: leases: b...

Last post by pseudonym3k - Today at 05:32:24 PM

As I said I don't mind if there is a canonical tool which there is.  I'll try to get it into the dnsmasq port. If it compiles and works it's good enough for the GUI button.

Thank you very much Franco.

#23

25.7, 25.10 Series / Re: in dnsmasq dhcp: leases: b...

Last post by pseudonym3k - Today at 05:30:47 PM

For the server the IP is not assigned while it is still in use by the client.
So what happens when another client requests an IP address?

Maybe I'm not fully understanding your scenario, but it seems like what you describe is same or close to what happens when the client itself sends the DHCP release? (Meaning, the client we did the phony release for, still thinks it has the lease, but it doesn't actually have it, right? So another client can request it, same as if the release was genuine?)

The difference I see, one client thinks it has a lease and the other one doesn't. But in both cases (for different reasons) they both will experience DNS and internet connection issues until a new lease is assigned. I don't know what transpires to get a client, that didn't request a release itself, to pick up the a lease. I don't remember having any trouble in this area with past DNSMasq routers that I've used, but maybe I just didn't happen to experience any.

#24

25.7, 25.10 Series / Re: 25.7.11 GeoIP [SOLVED]

Last post by IPinfo - Today at 05:24:33 PM

I work for IPinfo. It looks like the issue is resolved. Ping me if there is anything else you want us to look into. Thanks!

— Abdullah | DevRel, IPinfo

#25

25.7, 25.10 Series / Re: Continual issues updating

Last post by franco - Today at 05:12:02 PM

Just as a note if "fetch" doesn't work try "curl -o <filename> <url>" -- it means duplicating the file name on the command line for opnsense-update to find it but properly in the local directory (which is what "-l .") is about.


Cheers,
Franco

#26

25.7, 25.10 Series / Re: Continual issues updating

Last post by Matthew_Kent - Today at 04:48:42 PM

That's great, of course just after I posted, the update worked through the GUI.  But next time I will try manually to test.

Many thanks.

#27

General Discussion / Re: Why I am retiring from con...

Last post by trasz@ - Today at 04:47:47 PM

I fully agree that CoC cannot be applied selectively; it's just that from what I've seen, it's not much better when you're a committer.  Core ignored my own report couple of months ago, and I've seen two mentions of other cases like this - all from people with commit bits.

At the same time, it absolutely can be a problem to reply to an email; look up "executive dysfunction".  But there's like a half dozen people on core@, and a single one would be enough to move it forward, so I don't think that's the likely cause here.

#28

25.7, 25.10 Series / Re: CALL FOR TESTING: IPv6 imp...

Last post by franco - Today at 04:42:35 PM

Great. Can you share the log line here or via PM? I don't have a setup obviously. Just for double-checking.


Thanks,
Franco

#29

25.7, 25.10 Series / Re: CALL FOR TESTING: IPv6 imp...

Last post by pataps - Today at 04:35:23 PM

@pataps: yay, great, thanks! Among other things AFTR is now natively supported by the daemon (and advertised to the dhcp6c_script as "new_aftr_name") but I made a small mistake with the initial implementation:

https://github.com/opnsense/dhcp6c/commit/60c87d02c

Can you try again?


Cheers,
Franco

Yes, I can confirm it works as expected now. I can see "AFTR domain name" in the dhcp6c logs. Connectivity resorted after restart. Thanks!

#30

Zenarmor (Sensei) / Re: Latest Zenarmor update bre...

Last post by sy - Today at 04:28:48 PM

Hi,

Please create a ticket by using "Have Feedback" option in the bottom left corner of UI. Then please share the sessions as .csv file in Live Sessions.

https://www.zenarmor.com/docs/reporting-analytics/live-session-explorer#exporting-csv