Categories

  • Discussions about TNSR

    378 Topics
    1k Posts
    fractal_boyF
    @gigabitguru What TNSR version do you run? This bugs were fixed on TNSR 23.11. Here is the details: https://docs.netgate.com/tnsr/en/latest/releases/release-notes-23.11.html#vrrp

  • Discussions about pfSense Software, click a category below

    122k Topics
    779k Posts
    J
    @SteveITS I actually have DNS over TLS configured on several of these units (following the Quad9 instructions and double-checking against Netgate's own documentation) and I've noticed zero difference between those with and those without when on the offending ISP. If it's a routing problem, I suppose I have no way to rectify that, but why would that occur? I just tried two traceroutes, one to netgate.com and one to files.netgate.com. The one to netgate.com was a 5ms total trip. The one to files.netgate.com was 49ms. Then, I tried it on a different ISP. netgate.com was a 5ms total trip, but files.netgate.com just didn't complete at all. Finally, I tried a traceroute on the ISP that was quickly successful earlier tonight and got an 18ms trip to netgate.com and a 78ms trip to files.netgate.com, but that provider had no issues fetching the files for the upgrades. Seems to me, either there's a backbone issue in my area and one of the ISPs is using a different one that doesn't have a routing issue, or, Netgate's servers are being routed intermittently through a bad route. In any case, this sucks, and is causing huge amounts of wasted time. Edit: On a whim, I tried an update on the second ISP from above which didn't even complete the traceroute to files.netgate.com and it went through fine and in only a few minutes' time. So, I'm back to a routing issue with the first ISP which, of course, is the one most of my clients are using. I suppose there's nothing I can do?

  • Discussions about pfSense software packages

    20k Topics
    130k Posts
    keyserK
    I have yet to start testing but as far as I can tell pfSense and tailscale are not properly integrated to a level where you can assign the tailscale interface in pfsense and start doing portforwards and what not from the tail IP. Apparantly pfSense won’t boot and starts displaying the interface assignment CLI option because tailscale is not present at boot. I assume this is because tailscale is running as a user level service, and is not started/present at kernel interface assignment time. Since tailscale is using wireguard “underneath” one could hope this could be brought to work, but that is probably alttogether different code. Is there no option to allow pfsense to start the tailscale service/interface before it continues assigning interfaces? tailscale would be an enourmously usefull package if the interface could be assigned and serviced/routed like any other site 2 site VPN.

  • Discuss pfSense in other languages

    43k Topics
    268k Posts
    micneuM
    @nonick Ich habe keine Antwort auf deine Frage, mich interessiert nur, warum du bei der 25.11.1 bleiben willst.

  • Information about hardware available from Netgate

    3k Topics
    21k Posts
    M
    @marcosm makes sense According to df -h, I'm using about 7G now, but then there is overhead etc. and it starts out at about 30G, so 25% of that is only 8g; probably not enough, and i need some space for boot environments, which was just set to zero after the recent install. so i think the best course of action is just bite the bullet, replace the SSD and reinstall again. thanks for the info/help mark

  • Information about hardware available from Netgate

    44 Topics
    211 Posts
    AriKellyA
    It looks like unified web management could be coming soon. It would be great if it means easier control and management of all web services in one place. Let's see if any companies announce more details about it!

  • Feel free to talk about anything and everything here

    4k Topics
    19k Posts
    G
    @JonathanLee yeah AI is a tool just like fire is. Embrace it!
Copyright 2026 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.