Old rules deprecation

[dbd]

Hi.
What are the plan for the old rules ? Will they be deprecated, and then removed at some point ?

[Monviech (Cedrik)]

Yes but there is no plan for that yet and it might take a longer while still. Check our roadmap sometimes for updates:

https://opnsense.org/roadmap/

[franco]

Likely moving to plugins where they would still work, but definitely not before 2027. No plans to EoL it.


Cheers,
Franco

[Seimus]

There is enough time to get use to it, explore it and inspect it :)

The new rules section provides more visual appealing look and fixes some "mistakes" of the old ones.

Regards,
S.

[Monviech (Cedrik)]

I'm pretty surprised by the lack of negative feedback so far. So I guess overall it's a win (for most).

[Seimus]

You are surprised? :D

But people literary wanted/cried for separators.... They got it and even more...

Regards,
S.

[Monviech (Cedrik)]

The funny thing is, once the separators were implemented the people who cried for them never gave any feedback anymore.

[Seimus]

well... BAU [business-as-usual]

Or you guys achieved 100% customer satisfaction.

Regards,
S.

[OPNenthu]

I've been meaning to try the rule migration (haven't yet worked up the courage) mostly because I wasn't sure how a couple of single-interface floating rules would be handled.  I saw this in the 26.1 release notes:

Single interface from the floating interface will not be considered "floating" in priorities.

But I still don't know, will I need to make manual edits in the csv export to fix those?  Or will I need to add them manually afterward?

I'll probably give it a go soon. :)

[Monviech (Cedrik)]

You don't need any manual edits. Just import them, see the result, change things in the GUI as needed and then apply.

[dbd]

Thanks. That's a relief, as I'm a bit afraid it'll take me some time to migrate my main production system and its 2000 or so rules (or maybe the migration will work on first try, who knows ;-) )

[nero355]

I'm pretty surprised by the lack of negative feedback so far.

I will let you know once I have decided it's time to do the 26.x upgrade... Mwahahaha!!! >:)



But seriously :

Sometimes certain changes just simply "Hit the Jackpot!" and make everything soo much better that there is exactly 0,0 reason to complain about it :)

For me one of the most recent experiences was switching to OPNsense instead of my Ubiquiti UniFi USG 3P Router because it reminded me of the days when I had xDSL instead of Fiber and was using a DrayTek Router for that connection :
A simple and clear webGUI with so far all the options I could ever dream of and probably more than that, without fussing and fighting with Java and MongoDB from time to time !!!

And another change that was also simply excellent was the upgrade from Pi-Hole v5.x.x to v6.x.x when it was released last year and the whole concept of it basically totally changed :
- Dumped LigHTTPd
- Dumped PHP
- Switched to Civetweb
- FTLDNS got even better with a lof of new functions and features.
- The webGUI got basically 1:1 access to the config file which is also commented very nicely and extensively.



These two are now my favorite software projects on my network ;)

[Seimus]

I am having the same combination, Pihole + OPN.
But I run Piholes in a HA setup cause why not.

Regards,
S.

[Seimus]

The funny thing is, once the separators were implemented the people who cried for them never gave any feedback anymore.

Alright so that you don't feel sad about this I have one complain :)

Would it be possible to have the Statistic section in a single row if I expand its section?


It drives me nuts that its in two rows even tough I have a lot of space...

Regards,
S.

[OPNenthu]

You don't need any manual edits. Just import them, see the result, change things in the GUI as needed and then apply.

Just reporting back to say that the import went without hitch. :)

I did it yesterday and haven't seen any issues so far.  The single-interface Floating rules got converted to interface rules automatically.

The only negative is that it split up my related floating rules which were previously together.  I had two similar rules for the same purpose, but one was for IPv4 and one for IPv6.  The IPv4 rule was for WAN only and the IPv6 rule was for WAN + an interface group.  I had given them similar descriptions and everything.  Post migration the IPv4 rule became a WAN interface rule and the IPv6 rule stayed as Floating.  Same end result, but difference in organization and view.

I should probably take time to re-think my rules in light of the new way.