First impression and feedback

...try with Log viewer...there should be second tab for policy test.

Thanks. I do not understand why Policy test is not under Diagnostics. Also it is possible to edit the Web filter but not the Firewall rule.

Not a good deal. In order to test a policy, you need to move to another windows, under log viewer? Why?

.... and IKEv2 is here.... with patience...but it's here! good

Installed on my test XG. The one with the broken MTA sending function and used for testing IPv6.

Installed (upgraded) without any issues over MR7.

Mail would not send. Changed to MTA and setup smarthost. Mail would not send, unable to connect to mail servers. Restored mail to transparent proxy and I am able to send mail from MAC and XG if freshly generated, but none of the stuck stuff from earlier testing. Mail is queued for scanning, but never leaves while using MTA. Maybe a fresh install using the beta ISO is required? Mail reporting, shows some 200 messages from na to na, with one user on the network.

IPv6 is still broken. WAN receives an IPv6 /64 address but there is no way of finding what /56 has been assigned to me.

The new firewall screen will take a bit of getting used to, I will need to use my glasses more often to read the values.

A quick summary indicated that this version is a lot slicker overall with a faster GUI.

Need to check the report generation dates to see if they are being generated in AU time, not BST.

Ian

More information. Tried to create anew report and schedule it, but no matter what I do the report cannot be created, red flag keeps appearing. More testing to come.

rfcat_vk said:

The new firewall screen will take a bit of getting used to, I will need to use my glasses more often to read the values.

A quick summary indicated that this version is a lot slicker overall with a faster GUI.

Ian

AlanT , rfcat_vk is right. Firewall rules are so smooth to check and see now (even if a little bit bigger was better). Firewall rules compared to other menu are too small. For example take a look at the web policies. I hope you will reduce even the web section. In order to see the web policies, move up and down is required.

For the content filtering window, please make sure to enlarge it. It is too small and you need to use the scroll bar.

I still do not understand why you do not use the white space on the right. So much waste of it!

Anyway you did a great job on UI performance and even if Firewall Section is too small, I really like it. Well done!

Policy test is not under diagnostics because we wanted it on a pop-up second window.  It is for the same reason that Logs are in a pop-up window.  As alan indicated, we may add a link to it from Diagnostics so that it is easier to find.

I'm not sure about the status of editing the firewall rule from the Policy Test (like we can for Web).  Alan?


Getting layout and size right is hard for all browsers, screen sizes, user needs, and eyesight.  Remember that you can change zoom (Control-MouseWheel to zoom in and out, and Control-0 to reset to 100%).

Hello,

I agree with rfcat_vk and lferrara too that the font in a firewall packet rule should be a little bigger. 

Is it possible to vote somewhere?

;-) 

alda

Michael Dunn 

adjusting the zoom cannot be used because if you adjust the zoom for firewall rule, then the Web Policies will be too big. I guess you need to adjust the resolution a little bit, guys.

Also consider, please, to exploit the white space on the left and on top. Compared to v15 and to v16, guys, you improved the GUI alot. Having even a link of policy test inside Diagnostics should make sense.

IPSEC Profiles? Well done. I hope you will re-design most of the tab like that. Please move the NAT tab in another place. Under profiles, is really wasted and it does not make sense.

All the time, I need to explain to customers where the NAT tab is.

Thanks

The new firewall rule view is great!Reminds me very much of the Fortigate view ;)

We'll look at the font size with our designers, and see what can be done. 

IPSec page changes are the first place we are able to implement a new UX framework. It's actually a sneak peek of some of the benefits coming later next year, where we will move everything to an improved web framework. With that, we can consider a fully responsive design, that maximizes use of available screen space, but we won't consider it before then. 

Very good, because that missing response design is actually the only thing we are currently lacking in terms of web design.

I agree - they need to utilize the full browser width and increase the font sizes. Very difficult to read.

I agree - they need to utilize the full browser width and increase the font sizes. Very difficult to read.