Yep i think i misunderstood. I read TOR as TNSR.

In some cases you will be off the need to use routers also inside of your LAN network and pending on your network
topology and network Layer(s) it might be good to know
where exactly you should connect your TSNR router.

Although im still curious as to what switching
infrastructure is used.

It is pending on your network topology and/or network Layer design. as an example;

2 core switches (redundant) - Core Layer2
TOR Switch in each of the Racks - Distribution Layer
Access switches (stacked in ring) - Access Layer

This can be differing from design to design and also where
all these racks and/or switches will be installed. example:

IT Room (Server room) with Core Switches
on each stage of the building one rack with stacks and ToR
the stacks are connected to the ToR and the ToRs are connected to the Core switch(es)

Hmm, well that doesn't sound good.
Maybe consider a different hypervisor if that's your main firewall.

@dobby_ I am a Mikrotik fan and use the new RB450x2 to manage my LAN with pfSense as edge (WAN). I'll research what you presented (Tailscale) as it sounds interesting, thank you for sharing. Discovered this about new package coming: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fg_jIPVcioY

Well my profile page changed and has a lot more options. i assume that because i am now the 5 reputation that @johnpoz mentioned. thanks for the rep points who ever gave them.

@ddbnj
I have been assured it's not a pfsense issue, it's a me issue.

@rcoleman-netgate

it has now posted thanks

@zeroflow

Thank you for the link.

Has anyone successfully done this? I don't want to go down this tunnel first.

@stephenw10 Thanks for the reply back, I was going to grab the “site not found message” and post it but I upgraded over the weekend to version 102.0.5005.115-1 from 102.0.5005.61 and seems to be working for both AP and pfsense. After I upgraded I clearly I didn’t try it again but now it seems to be working . I guess we could mark this resolved, thanks for your interest in helping

@picia1990 You can also run the stand-alone controller app on a Linux, Windows or Mac computer, as needed. It doesn't have to run all the time, like a physical controller does, or on a dedicated machine.

Looks like they are calling it "Network Application" now, under the software section, not network controller anymore...

https://www.ui.com/download/unifi/

Great thread you started. Im still new to the pfsense product line having come from other vendors. In the beginning, i was frustrated that there was feature incompleteness when compared to other products but I have since changed my mentality a bit

The obvious fact that it's free and there is paid support behind it makes me feel comfortable deploying Just understanding the use case for the product. I see pfsense as a router and firewall (L4) first and foremost. The VPN functionality when used in an "as-is" deployment is very good. The problems start to come in when you now have a business requirement that a 10+ year old firewall OS doesnt even have a feature set for. Need traffic visibility? Nope. Simple things like, which IP is the top talker between 8am - 4pm. No historical data is found. Sure you can use darkstat but cmon....its more of a hack and it provides no meaningful data. There is no application awareness despite what the marketing on the netgate site will tell you. OpenAppID rules have not been maintained on pfsense since 2017. The metadata conf is updated yes but not the text rules. I could go on but why bother.

My hope is that the pfsense+ train is where the added functionality will appear. I know it's something that people dont want to hear but if they charge for it down the line but has feature completeness in key areas identified in this thread then ill pay. pfsense CE will continue to be free.
As others have said on other forums and even here, it's a great product but one should only deploy in SMB scenarios. If your company has any I.T. budget then more than likely they are going with a named vendor.

@davidylau

TP-Link have (earlier) had a bad reputation , due to Vlan1 leaking.
And them not seeming to care .....

You might consider the D-Link DGS-1100-08 too
https://www.amazon.com/D-Link-Ethernet-Managed-Internet-DGS-1100-08V2/dp/B08P2C2GXF/

I have 20+ of these D-Links , and they are easy to configure , and does what they should .. Max. 32 Vlans i think in the 1100-08 , enough for home use.

/Bingo

It's almost certainly just use the frame buffer and outputting at it's default resolution. I doubt a different version of pfSense would behave any differently.

You might just try a different monitor. Some TVs just don't handle the low res and refresh rates well.

That board has a serial header. You could fit a serial port and use the serial console instead.

You could just install in something else and then move the drive across. You would only need to use the console at all if the NICs are different.

Steve

@elmo1943
I did the same.... I got rid of that stupid Netgear router that doesn't really support VPN anyway and bought:
2x Trendnet 5-port unmanaged 2.5G switches.
1x Plugable USB ethernet adapter.
1x TRENDnet 2.5GBase-T PCIe Network Adapter, TEG-25GECTX.
New router: 4X 2.5GbE Intel I225-V Ethernet Firewall Appliance Mini PC, Intel Celeron J4125 MOGINSOK AES-NI VPN Router PC HDMI VGA 4GB RAM 64GB MSATA SSD.
Now my whole network is nice and fast.