3 ms·

I'd really love to see an API or a unified configuration system. At $WORK we have a need for many small firewall appliances, but I refuse to use anything we can

I'd really love to see an API or a unified configuration system. At $WORK we have a need for many small firewall appliances, but I refuse to use anything we can't deploy zero-touch, automate, monitor and back up/restore in a semi-sane way. Either it needs a configuration language like Cisco/Juniper than can be dumped/imported/configured over SSH, or a web API (supposedly on the roadmap for pfsense 3.0 ... ?). I can't say I'm too familiar with the project, but it feels like it's just not a priority and that it's is going to remain very web UI focussed.

gonzo 11y ago
> I'd really love to see an API or a unified configuration system. That's next (3.0) > feels like it's just not a priority and that it's is going to remain very web UI focussed. part of it is the audience we have. part of it is dealing with the architecture we have. but... trust me, it's likely more important to me than you.
jannemann 11y ago
pfsense was forked a year or two ago, their 2.3 is just to keep up with the new kid on the block opnsense. And guess what, they have an API ;) https://opnsense.org/ https://opnsense.org/
- FireBeyond 11y ago
  I don't really see what OPNsense has done too much differently, other than commence re-writing the UI in a different PHP framework and Bootstrap it. To look at it, you're largely looking at pfSense. I couldn't find a clear map of what has been changed or added to.
  - gonzo 11y ago
    One of the team members at OPNsense "liberated" the source to his former employer's fork of pfSense (they were using it for their product.) That's how they got to where they are. The pace of innovation in that project has slowed since its launch.
MatthaeusHarris 11y ago
I have had decent luck the few times I've just dumped the xml config from one pfSense box and loaded it on another. But yes, I eagerly await the API in 3.0
seanp2k2 11y ago
Super nasty but RouterOS has an API: http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API The hardware has been around for a long time (Soekris) and there are many out in the field.

gonzo 11y ago

> I'd really love to see an API or a unified configuration system. That's next (3.0) > feels like it's just not a priority and that it's is going to remain very web UI focussed. part of it is the audience we have. part of it is dealing with the architecture we have. but... trust me, it's likely more important to me than you.

jannemann 11y ago

pfsense was forked a year or two ago, their 2.3 is just to keep up with the new kid on the block opnsense. And guess what, they have an API ;) https://opnsense.org/ https://opnsense.org/

FireBeyond 11y ago
I don't really see what OPNsense has done too much differently, other than commence re-writing the UI in a different PHP framework and Bootstrap it. To look at it, you're largely looking at pfSense. I couldn't find a clear map of what has been changed or added to.
- gonzo 11y ago
  One of the team members at OPNsense "liberated" the source to his former employer's fork of pfSense (they were using it for their product.) That's how they got to where they are. The pace of innovation in that project has slowed since its launch.

MatthaeusHarris 11y ago

I have had decent luck the few times I've just dumped the xml config from one pfSense box and loaded it on another. But yes, I eagerly await the API in 3.0

seanp2k2 11y ago

Super nasty but RouterOS has an API: http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API The hardware has been around for a long time (Soekris) and there are many out in the field.