"ping zaphod" without "daheim.local" is working! If I "ping localhost" the reply is "zaphod" not "zaphod.daheim.local". But does it realy matter? I think, if I (like i did) query a DNS server via NSLOOKUP and the resolver answers with "…Non-existent domain", it should not be a problem of the client machine?! Is there a way to look into the table, where the DNS server holds its entrys? I found nothing in the status or diagnostic page or status.php.

I will like to have the option to use the danish dyndns.dk site in dynamic dns of pfSense.. Thangs for the nice work you all have done on the pfSense software.. Keep op the good work..  ;D best regards Per Jørgensen Denmark

tried serch did we :). http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,1595.0.html posted this in beginning of july, and from what i can tell ppl are still having the same prb as you me, it works when i´m running other linux/bsd based fw´s but not with pfsense for some reason. /F

This has been addressed in the latest snapshots.

Good man! Too bad I don't code php. :P Glad to see people chipping in though.

…or use a dyndns updater behind your firewall that connects to an outside server to ask what it's current public IP is. Nearly all providers have these as free downloads somewhere at their site though I would go with scotts suggestion. It's less problems having the pfSense at the real WAN.

Well under Status -> Interface it only shows the primary and secondary. So I downloaded the config again and they are stil there, so when my ISP loose there main DNS server I'll see if this works :) Will try to think of another test before then though ;)

Then, is there no way to configure dhclient manually in pfsense?

After turning on static arp support, please run the following: arp -an and show the entries that should be static.

Try to reassign LAN IP from the shell. It asks if you want to have DHCP at LAN. Maybe it will overwrite your DHCP settings and reset these checkboxes.

ha ha That was dumb of me.  ha Thank you very much.  I will try to remember to open my eyes a little wider next time. Thanks!

I just commited VLAN DHCP support to my own branch, doesn't touch the GUI at all. Here's the config it can generate: option domain-name "local"; default-lease-time 7200; max-lease-time 86400; authoritative; log-facility local7; ddns-update-style none; shared-network "vlan 69 on vr0" {         subnet 10.69.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {                 pool {                         range 10.69.0.10 10.69.0.20;                 }                 option routers 10.69.0.1;                 next-server 10.69.0.1;                 filename "pxelinux.0";         } } shared-network "vlan 68 on vr0" {         subnet 10.68.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {                 pool {                         range 10.68.0.10 10.68.0.20;                 }                 option routers 10.68.0.1;                 next-server 10.68.0.1;                 filename "pxelinux.0";         }         subnet 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {         } } If you are lucky the attached patch works, but the pf team have modified the dhcp function a bit from m0n0 and I make some rather grand assumptions in the code. services.inc.vlan-dhcp.patch.txt

6 AP's in different locations ? They're not in the neighbourhood, and sharing/overlapping the same channels, are they ? Load this one : http://netstumbler.com/ and have a hunt down.

Btw, all the attachments are back. cmb managed to restore everything. Thanks cmb.

I think that's beyond the capabilities of the dns-forwarder.

I am all for it.  Thats something that could be included in 1.0 immediately as a package, too.

Static mappings have to be outside the dhcp pool, so this alert is correct.

Can each of you show the following commands from a shell: ifconfig -a cat /var/etc/dhcpd.conf