Re: PfSense + ubiquity

Top Page
This message is part of the following thread:
Mthe complete thread tree sorted by date
MThomas Scott via PLUG-discuss at <-
MStephen Partington via PLUG-discuss at ->
Attachments:
Message as email
+ (text/plain)
+ (text/html)
+ (text/plain)
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss
Date:  
To: Thomas Scott
CC: Michael Butash, Main PLUG discussion list
Subject: Re: PfSense + ubiquity
So Cox subs can reach out to you when we're having saturation issues? :)

Having been around for the beginnings of cable modem tech at @home networks
in the 90's dealing with almost every big MSO (Cox, Comcast, ATT,
Intermedia, etc), I like to talk about the tech as a bit proud where it's
gone. I liked Cox as one of the last decent hold-outs for things like
keeping Usenet around longer than they should, not killing customers for
mpaa/riaa abuse complaints, and keeping data caps off when the industry was
moving in that direction, so I think they're better than the rest, but
eventually they hopped on the money train with data caps too. And now
they're paying for their pro-pirate stance as well with lawsuits against
them winning
<https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/legal-and-management/8546842/cox-1-billion-piracy-lawsuit-labels-publishers>,
probably using that extra cap revenue to pay the trolls.

Would I go back? Not as long as they have data caps, and someone else
around me doesn't, but yes - much better network. I don't like random
overages in my bill, I get that enough with power. If I thought the covid
restrictions to remove caps would hold, I'd probably switch back now, but
I'm sure they'll find a reason to reimplement them asap as that's lost
revenue on your rsu's.

It's always good to hear from other docsis speakers, welcome back!

-mb


On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 6:54 PM Thomas Scott <>
wrote:

> Day job is for a certain ISP HQ in Atlanta that supplies internet for a
> lot of the valley - I work in Network Operations first in Phoenix and now
> in Atlanta, and was surprised to see so much of what I talk about everyday
> in PLUG!
>
> CLink trying to play FTTN as FTTH, nothing new there. I live in a
> neighborhood outside of Atlanta that had some AT&T brownfield development
> for FTTH, and I've had no regrets (300 up 300 down!) Cox is moving towards
> "10G" with DOCSIS 4.0 and they are getting fiber closer to the home with
> their node splits. If you find that you all off a sudden have an extra hop
> in your path, that might be the seen you've been on one of those nodes that
> have been lit and split. The amount of bandwidth going up and down will go
> up dramatically.
>
> @Michael - yeah I don't think the caps are going anywhere, the industry as
> a whole (driven by big red) has moved that direction, but I think you'll
> see speeds and caps rise as N+0 goes to full duplex DOCSIS. I do know
> they've been relaxed with the COVID-19 FCC initiatives, but how long that
> lasts, I'm not sure.
>
> @Mac - the cox supplied modems are almost all going to "Panoramic Wi-Fi"
> and the number of holes found in DOCSIS devices is... disturbing to say the
> least. It was designed to be operated on a shared RF medium, and like other
> "trusting" protocols (i.e. BGP) has a lot of issues. The more virtualized
> it becomes, I think we'll see more of those go away - the smaller the
> broadcast domains, and the smaller the first upstream router, the better
> those will be able to be maintained and automated. Looking at the road
> maps, it will be interesting what comes next.
>
> - Thomas Scott | <>
>
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 3:54 PM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
> > wrote:
>
>> Oddly enough, the model number of your router stuck in my head, the
>> C3000Z, and I realized I used the same thing, but for my 150mbps dsl
>> modem. You sure you have actual gig fiber? They tend to misrepresent
>> their actual products in sales. Ask me how I know.
>>
>> <tldr>
>>
>> I say this because I called CL before going to them, and asked if I could
>> get fiber in the network. They said yes. Hmm, I knew damn well they did
>> not, as no one wants to build fiber into old peoria neighborhoods such as
>> mine. After some conversation and calling him out, he explained that "oh,
>> it's a gigabit network", just not fiber to your house. I could get
>> dual-band DSL, which means 75mbps x2, for a total of 150mbps, delivered by
>> a gigabit network! I sort of facepalmed, but ordered it anyways as it was
>> significantly more than I had with cox (80mbps at the time I think),
>> significantly cheaper, and no bandwidth cap.
>>
>> If there is anything other than fiber directly in your modem, I'd call
>> bullocks, but FTTH is a myth to me.
>>
>> Crappier service, but I'll take the (usually) cheap and fast. It is most
>> certainly not gigabit fiber to my house, even though that's what they tried
>> to sell me I was getting. Only new house/community builds get fiber, and
>> if even that. Cox did the same to compete with Google fiber, and as soon
>> as Google Fiber died, so did Cox ever mentioning fiber again. Truth is Cox
>> doesn't need it, shielded coax can deliver soon 10g over it just fine with
>> new modulation schemas and docsis improvements. Centurylink's 100 year old
>> 2-8 wire infrastructure cannot, all they can do is build new with fiber,
>> but they probably won't being decrepit.
>>
>> I hear friends of mine mention they have fiber, and wonder just if they
>> really do. This is why Google Fiber folded, it was unrealistic unless a
>> net-new community build. Google fiber retrofits were a disaster
>> <https://gizmodo.com/when-google-fiber-abandons-your-city-as-a-failed-experi-1833244198>
>> .
>>
>> Fun-fact: Oddly enough the guy that built Google Fiber, Milo Medin, is
>> the same guy that started @Home Networks back in late 90's for Cable Modem
>> services, and pioneered current industry standards in use today globally to
>> deliver cable internet. The last-mile regional MSO providers snuffed
>> him/company back then, took it over themselves, and then they snuffed him
>> out again as he tried the same incursion with Google Fiber, and realized it
>> just cost too damn much to compete. Cable Monopolies, flawless victory.
>>
>> Next I expect he'll team up with Elon or Bezos to try again via
>> terrestrial.
>>
>> -mb
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 10:32 AM Michael Butash <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I tend to find the CL network a bit wonky, having moved to DSL from Cox
>>> (damn bandwidth caps). I find the general performance is worse than cox,
>>> where I suspect they simply don't manage the bandwidth and are far too
>>> oversubscribed as it feels like the internet buffers at times, literally.
>>> Cox would occasionally get that way too, and it was easy to see in an
>>> ongoing MTR when their peering in LA would get slammed and latency would
>>> jump (not to mention I know the guys that manage that bandwidth, telling
>>> them often got it fixed). Oddly Using MTR with CL, they filter icmp/udp
>>> specifically that seems to hide responses to track well. Go figure, truth
>>> hurts, so hide it.
>>>
>>> Having worked for service providers numerous times over the years,
>>> working in and building them, routers are always an issue in a metro city
>>> or even interstate networks. No two platforms are ever the same, whether
>>> buying all Cisco, Juniper, Nokia, or any combo of all and more, which as
>>> you said, many do. Hardest part is usually capacity planning, particularly
>>> with something like covid, every isp took a kick in the groin at the same
>>> time to augment their networks, suddenly by some magnitude, when everyone
>>> else in the world is doing the same. Slowness in networking can often be
>>> attributed to those not having enough capacity, though they'll never admit
>>> it.
>>>
>>> I'm on the 150mbps dsl, and a speed test can provide that for sure, but
>>> general usage, which I use a lot of tabs and apps, tends to bring things to
>>> a crawl often. I'd even go back to cox if they got rid of the bandwidth
>>> cap. CL might as well be government, and they're run by unions, so nothing
>>> happens fast, including capacity augments.
>>>
>>> Re: mac limits, having been around Cox both as a customer and network
>>> engineer working there early 2000's, the mac security was more about
>>> limiting the amount of hosts behind a modem that could be allowed to a
>>> single mac and IP address. Back Circa 1998 I had my first Cox modem, and
>>> there were no routers, you just got yourself a phat 10baset switch from
>>> computer city and connected up your family on public ip addresses, each
>>> with their own mac and ip's. With no limits or filters that led to
>>> security issues (hey, I see my neighbor's c drive shared!), Cox and others
>>> then pushed people to then buy a router, which by then around 2002, you
>>> could buy a cheap wrt54g linksys. The advent of docsis also allowed to
>>> both filter and restrict the macs by default, also let them reduce to now
>>> 1:1 IP to User ratio, which was good for ip management, the abuse
>>> departments, and fbi warrants from legal. You used to be able to buy
>>> another ip, they'd push a new docsis config with mac-alowed=2, but not
>>> anymore.
>>>
>>> Same reasons they're just building in the router functions now, it
>>> ensures they can offer some basic customer security, plus lets them run
>>> whatever spyware in their embedded router os they want. Better off buying
>>> your own standalone modem and router combo, one you ideally trust.
>>>
>>> -mb
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:07 PM Donald Mac McCarthy via PLUG-discuss <
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Putting a CL modem into a bridge mode where it only handles the PPPoE
>>>> connection is simply checking a radial select button and hitting apply. If
>>>> your firewall supports PPoE, even better, as you no longer need their Modem
>>>> and router in the mix. But, that is just my experience, and it is limited.
>>>> I have a CL fiber to the door drop, and they gave me a Zyxel C3000Z device
>>>> for connection. I promptly ripped it out and allowed pfSense to maintain
>>>> the PPPoE connection. I had to call support for packet loss one time, and
>>>> they refused to help me. So goes it rolling your own I guess. Turns out a
>>>> day later we had a several hour outage due to one of the multiplexing cards
>>>> used to distribute the 40Gb/s core fiber to the GPON devices failed. Seems
>>>> like that was a likely culprit for some of the packet loss the previous day.
>>>>
>>>> Having just gotten off a call in which the Senior Director of Security
>>>> Architecture and Engineering (a friend of mine from Atlanta) for Cox was a
>>>> participant, before he hung up I asked him about the typical Cox supplied
>>>> modems. Very, very few of them are purely bridge devices - especially with
>>>> the push to "Panoramic WiFi". A member of CentryLink who was also on the
>>>> call (ISP InfoSec sharing/working group) mentioned how painful it was to
>>>> support the number of company issued modems/gateway/router models there are
>>>> for different infrastructure and connections - let alone ones that
>>>> customers buy and bring to the party. BTW, the MAC address thing is because
>>>> they do actually use a MAC locking like feature for security. Apparently it
>>>> is bad for the network if you just go plug your modem in at several houses
>>>> in the neighborhood due to the way DOCSIS works. I still have to dig into
>>>> that and ask some more questions on that one.
>>>>
>>>> There was a collective groan among the engineers when another ISP spoke
>>>> up about the number of critical flaws they find in their DOCIS devices each
>>>> year.
>>>>
>>>> With the amount of consolidation which has happened in the past 20
>>>> years in the broadband market, the landscape is riddled with legacy bits
>>>> and pieces of this provider and that provider somehow being coerced into
>>>> working together to accomplish passing traffic. One of the ISPs mentioned
>>>> they had no less than 350 different models of core switching equipment made
>>>> by more than a dozen manufacturers in their network. They have a team of 40
>>>> (really 5 teams of 8) that simply monitor and ensure that the OSPF
>>>> functions properly among the various models and brands to make sure that
>>>> the network properly heals/manages congestion.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, just throwing it out so that people can see and understand the
>>>> picture at a higher level. The final comment on the call was from an
>>>> engineer at a midwestern rural provider and one that I am sure many of us
>>>> can relate to. She said she spends all day pulling her hair out trying to
>>>> keep the network functioning at the highest of levels. The first words out
>>>> of her kids' mouths when she gets home are "Mom, the WiFi seems slow today."
>>>>
>>>> I talked with Alexander this afternoon, and it looks like he has a
>>>> functioning network again. The APs were reluctant to give up their old
>>>> configuration, so a factory reset and new DHCP leases seem to have done the
>>>> trick.
>>>>
>>>> Hopefully this sheds a bit of light on something for a few people.
>>>>
>>>> Mac
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/4/20 4:59 PM:
>>>>
>>>> Ideally when you plug into a cable modem, it comes up, and passes your
>>>> ethernet to the cmts in a bridge, lets one mac address dhcp/arp, and things
>>>> work. It learns that one ip/mac, and disallows any other mac. No
>>>> security, nat, nothing, just real dumb dhcp + default routing with a public
>>>> ip. Routers/firewalls try to NAT you, thus double NAT if using a router
>>>> behind it.
>>>>
>>>> CL sells you a dsl modem/router that does your local security whether
>>>> you want it or not, full router/nat/firewall, and probably spyware. Making
>>>> it a modem is possible, but takes work, and your firewall has to support
>>>> PPPoE (not all can/do). Last time I touched a combo Cox router/modem, I
>>>> didn't see any way to do so. I told them to buy a real modem, and that
>>>> worked with their belkin/cisco/linksys/netgear they had.
>>>>
>>>> If your "modem" mentions wifi, it's a router/firewall, not a modem.
>>>> Not all are clear about this, as they dumb it down for consumers, but an
>>>> important point.
>>>>
>>>> -mb
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:53 PM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss <
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I Owned a Nighthawk Router/Modem combo, The way that Netgear handled
>>>>> that is that the modem was hard-wired to a bridge on the router side. and
>>>>> technically you could see it as a separate device in the router configs if
>>>>> you rooted around enough. but the modem side was just a modem.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:03 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Cox modems *are* bridges first and foremost typically, unless you get
>>>>>> a bundled router/modem, which is only what CenturyLink sells. If you got a
>>>>>> "router/modem" combo, just buy a modem-only device for a dumb bridge and
>>>>>> simple ethernet for a public ip. I recommend staying with an arris cable
>>>>>> modem, originally motorola, they basically developed cable modem docsis,
>>>>>> and are always the best.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I moved from Cox to CL when Cox started adding a usage cap, and that
>>>>>> was new to me to get my Fortinet firewall online with CL and their DSL
>>>>>> doing PPPOE. I've seen the router/cable modem combo boxes later, but never
>>>>>> owned one as I always have my own router/firewall.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -mb
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 8:36 AM Donald Mac McCarthy <>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Will Cox allow for a bridge/virtual bridge mode? Xfinity does, which
>>>>>>> allows you to put in a firewall, and use the modem only as a gateway,
>>>>>>> therefore preventing a double NAT situation. Never lived in a Cox area
>>>>>>> before, and currently ride CL fiber.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mac
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/3/20 2:00 PM:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cox modems will learn and allow only 1 mac at a time (unless
>>>>>>> business is set to allow more, but not on residential). If switching out
>>>>>>> firewalls, I 99% of time reboot the modem first and foremost.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -mb
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 12:08 PM Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss
>>>>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I got it working.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I assigned the SFP+ port as my LAN and assigned it the 10.x.x.x/16
>>>>>>>> network. Then I had to call COX and list the WAN Mac address with them.
>>>>>>>> Upon doing so I was able to reach external sites, and all downstream
>>>>>>>> devices started coming alive!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks for all the suggestions and help!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Alexander
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my Galaxy S10+
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020, 03:14 Herminio Hernandez, Jr. via PLUG-discuss
>>>>>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Can you login to the FW via the LAN interface? Can you ping the
>>>>>>>>> FW LAN interface? Check the routing and NAT policy on the FW. All outbound
>>>>>>>>> traffic should NAT to the FW WAN interface and there should be a default (
>>>>>>>>> 0.0.0.0/0) route to the internet.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 7:27 PM Seabass via PLUG-discuss <
>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm with Mac, I think it is not the firewall, but if you have the
>>>>>>>>>> ability to plug it into a display with a keyboard, you can use that for
>>>>>>>>>> configuration and modify a different device at the same time.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Makes it easier to troubleshoot by giving you the ability to
>>>>>>>>>> configure your pfSense ports at the same time.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Message: 2
>>>>>>>>>> Date: Sat, 2 May 2020 09:04:35 -0700
>>>>>>>>>> From: Donald Mac McCarthy <>
>>>>>>>>>> To: "Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss"
>>>>>>>>>> <>
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: pfSense + Ubiquity
>>>>>>>>>> Message-ID: <>
>>>>>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I can help - but I am unavailable to do so until tomorrow.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Make sure there are not any thing other than default VLANs on the
>>>>>>>>>> interfaces to start with. Ubiquiti is famous for not havinght
>>>>>>>>>> eSFP+
>>>>>>>>>> ports active in the default configuration, and I believe the
>>>>>>>>>> switch has
>>>>>>>>>> all the ports to shutdown on default config as well.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think it is the switch not passing traffic through - no the
>>>>>>>>>> firewall.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Mac
>>>>>>>>>> Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/2/20 8:53 AM:
>>>>>>>>>> > Does anyone out there have experience with pfSence and Ubiquity
>>>>>>>>>> switches?
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > I have zero with either but that didn't stop me from buying
>>>>>>>>>> both ....
>>>>>>>>>> > how hard could it be?! LOL.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > I bought a Negate XG-1537-1U. I bought a Unifi Pro 24 PoE
>>>>>>>>>> switch.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > I can configure the FW immediately after
>>>>>>>>>> > firstboot/restore-default-configs, but only if i set the LAN
>>>>>>>>>> interface
>>>>>>>>>> > to be the cable that goes directly to my laptop. That's great,
>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>> > that does shit for the downstream switch.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > I have a 10GB SFP+ Port that I want to configure as the
>>>>>>>>>> downstream
>>>>>>>>>> > port to ubiquity, but any configuration other than mentioned
>>>>>>>>>> above
>>>>>>>>>> > fails .... and I'm now on my 12th "Reset To Factory Defaults"
>>>>>>>>>> ... any
>>>>>>>>>> > help on this would be greatly appreciated!
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> > Alexander
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Sent from my Galaxy S10+
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> > PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>>>> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>> > https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy
>>>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations
>>>>>>>>>> Open Source Context
>>>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://oscontext.com
>>>>>>>>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>>>>>>>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>>>>>>>>> URL: <
>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20200502/aeab14b4/attachment-0001.html
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> End of PLUG-discuss Digest, Vol 179, Issue 2
>>>>>>>>>> ********************************************
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy
>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations
>>>>>>> Open Source Context
>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://oscontext.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from
>>>>> rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button.
>>>>>
>>>>> Stephen
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy
>>>> Director, Field Operations
>>>> Open Source Context
>>>> +1.602.584.4445
>>>>
>>>> https://oscontext.com
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
This message was posted to the following mailing lists:
Plug Discuss
Mailing List Info | Nearby Messages		<-Re: PfSense + ubiquityRe: PfSense + ubiquity->
Some Mailing List Archive administrated by UnconfiguredLurker (version 2.3)