That was something one of the developers was messing with at one point, 3 does the same thing as 1, it should be set to 1 though to make sure it continues to function as desired in future releases. I just changed it.

Chances are that your ISP has some faulty equipment on your circuit.  We had a client with a similar situation and it wasn't until they installed pfSense and were able to demonstrate using the RRD graphs that the line was becoming completely unusable at times and that the line going down had nothing to do with link saturation, that the ISP finally started taking their issue seriously.

You can look for QuickBridge. It create a unicast tunnel between 2 multicast enable site.

http://blog.pfsense.com

When it'd done ;)

I think, you should open a thread on the bounty section

A quick use of Google will find you what you're after ;)

http://www.linitx.org/forum/
http://forums.imedialinux.com/

etc, etc, etc

Sorry forgot about the other general forum…...

Posted this at Experts-exchange but have not gotten an answer and I am under the gun to get this done today.

That tool seems to be a non windows solution so I will have to keep searching.

Thanks for the effort.

Mark

With Captive Portal you can provide the authentication portion. Outside of that there is no native functionality. There is no point in porting one of the two linux NAC solutions due to the integration with iptables on the linux-side. It would need to be written from the ground up with PF in mind.

Great idea!

I would suggest a wiki page that anyone could go in and edit. Then post updates to the page to this thread (or a similar one) so anyone can watch the thread for updates.

Or, people could post updates as a reply to a thread, and then have the original author update the main post with the updates so they are easy to read - but then if the original author goes MIA the info in the thread can lag…

Aliases ar not only making things easier or mkore readable, they also help to keep the amount of rules pretty low when using ports aliases in combination with hosts- or networkaliases.

Info –> Versions

Live CD with Installer
The Live CD platform allows you to run directly from the CD without installing to a hard drive or Compact Flash card. The configuration can be saved on a floppy disk or USB flash drive. Some features are not compatible with the live CD platform. In most circumstances, this should only be used as an evaluation of the software with your particular hardware.

Hard drive installation
The live CD includes an installer option to install pfSense to the hard drive on your system. This is the preferred means of running pfSense. The entire hard drive must be overwritten, dual booting with another OS is not supported.

Embedded
The embedded version is specifically tailored for use with any hardware using Compact Flash rather than a hard drive. CF cards can only handle a limited number of writes, so the embedded version runs read only from CF, with read/write file systems as RAM disks. Packages are not supported on embedded versions.

I'm talking about a whole other system. Life FreeNAs is not a firewall, but its based off the same monowall code. I'll look into the freeNas Option for now.

No and No. Actually these rules are on a per year basis iirc. So if you block let's say on January the 1st it will block on that day every year (2008, 2009, 2010,…). Why is a 15 minute slice not enough? A Cronjob will run every 15 minutes to see if the ruleset has to be changed and recreate and reload the filter if needed. Making smaller slices will put additional load on the firewall as it would have to check for changes more often. We thought 15 minutes intervals should be enough usually.

@tacfit:

I moved off Microsoft's ISA 2004 firewall.

:o   thank goodness for that!  :)

back in the day, I setup OpenBSD at my network edge and built the pf.conf by hand, mainly to learn, and liked it a lot. eventually got lazy, and setup a soekris/m0n0wall, but wished it was openbsd based or at least had pf.  then I heard about pfsense, but I just sort of followed the progress forever and never tried it.    eventually my network expanded and outgrew m0n0 and I required some of pfsense's better features like loadbalance, and I'm pretty impressed.  I don't use captive portal nor have tons of users, I just have a handful of very bandwidth hungry users and I wouldn't use anything other than pfsense at this point