https://redmine.pfsense.org/https://redmine.pfsense.org/favicon.ico?16780521162013-02-12T14:57:08ZpfSense bugtrackerpfSense - Bug #2362: Deleting last/only port forward doesn't remove from secondaryhttps://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/2362?journal_id=106862013-02-12T14:57:08ZJim Pingle
<ul></ul><p>Does this still happen on 2.1? I thought I fixed all of these not too long ago.</p> pfSense - Bug #2362: Deleting last/only port forward doesn't remove from secondaryhttps://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/2362?journal_id=107202013-02-12T19:15:27ZChris Buechlercbuechler@gmail.com
<ul><li><strong>Target version</strong> set to <i>2.1</i></li></ul><p>Yeah it does as of Friday's snapshot at least.</p> pfSense - Bug #2362: Deleting last/only port forward doesn't remove from secondaryhttps://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/2362?journal_id=107272013-02-13T08:00:20ZRenato Botelhorenato@netgate.com
<ul><li><strong>Assignee</strong> set to <i>Renato Botelho</i></li></ul> pfSense - Bug #2362: Deleting last/only port forward doesn't remove from secondaryhttps://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/2362?journal_id=107322013-02-13T09:43:53ZRenato Botelhorenato@netgate.com
<ul></ul><p>Same happens for last/only filter rule. I'm working on a solution.</p> pfSense - Bug #2362: Deleting last/only port forward doesn't remove from secondaryhttps://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/2362?journal_id=107342013-02-13T13:20:10ZRenato Botelhorenato@netgate.com
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>New</i> to <i>Feedback</i></li><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>0</i> to <i>100</i></li></ul><p>Applied in changeset <a class="changeset" title="Fully sync filter and nat sections. Fixes #2362" href="https://redmine.pfsense.org/projects/pfsense/repository/2/revisions/a1fb7d61c4be90e6b6fcbc44fd644677cb0761e4">a1fb7d61c4be90e6b6fcbc44fd644677cb0761e4</a>.</p> pfSense - Bug #2362: Deleting last/only port forward doesn't remove from secondaryhttps://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/2362?journal_id=107492013-02-14T02:02:46ZErmal Luçieri@pfsense.org
<ul></ul><p>If those seciton need to be synched no matter what than its better to remove the options completely from the filter sync configuration page to not create the impression this is controllable.</p> pfSense - Bug #2362: Deleting last/only port forward doesn't remove from secondaryhttps://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/2362?journal_id=107502013-02-14T04:15:16ZRenato Botelhorenato@netgate.com
<ul></ul><p>I don't believe option should be removed since it is still valid for rules from Master you don't want to sync.</p>
<p>- Rules set to nosync on Master won't be send to Slave.<br />- All rules on Slave will be overwritten.</p> pfSense - Bug #2362: Deleting last/only port forward doesn't remove from secondaryhttps://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/2362?journal_id=110302013-03-05T21:20:20ZChris Buechlercbuechler@gmail.com
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>Feedback</i> to <i>Resolved</i></li></ul> pfSense - Bug #2362: Deleting last/only port forward doesn't remove from secondaryhttps://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/2362?journal_id=419952019-08-21T10:42:14ZJim Pingle
<ul><li><strong>Category</strong> changed from <i>62</i> to <i>XMLRPC</i></li></ul>