ahh. and now im having a problem with accessing tversity over my network with pfsense. with the hardware router i got no problems. but with pfsense, my ps3 and other devices won't see the tversity on the main computer. also, with my pings, when i ping the WAN1 address, i get <1ms latency, but when I ping WAN1 Gateway, WAN2 Address, and WAN2 Gateway, I get latencies like 20ms which is not normal. With the hardware router, pinging those 4 addresses yields latencies <1ms for all of them.

Ok, thank you for explanation.

PFBox1 will shape and route 192.168.2.0. This box will have to let the public ip's without shaping them.

PFBox2 will shape the public ip's with guaranteed bandwidth.

Need more info about interfaces, bridge or how can  I implement this ?

Make sure that once you create a load balancing pool, you go to the firewall rules for your LAN interface and change the default allow rule to use that load balancing pool under the Gateway section of the firewall rule. This will get your basic load balancing going. If you have any allow rules above it that don't use the load balancing pool, the traffic will follow that. The rules are processed in a first come first serve manner.

Yeah, that's what I do, but you can't do any load balancing or failover because the default gateway's will be the same IP address which isn't supported. It works well just for the extra address though.

The WAN has a 208.x.x.x/29 address from the ISP and I have a 204.x.x.87 vIP on that interface so I can't create one on the LAN interface also.

What seems to be a/the solution is to add a static route on the LAN side (route add 204.x.x.87 gw 204.x.x.1) which sends packets to .87 to the LAN interface which then sends them over to the P175 subnet because that LAN interface knows about it.  Otherwise the traffic seems to get stuck on the LAN because nobody on that subnet has the .87 address.

I'll try your suggestion also since that would eliminate the need for a static route on the source machines.

Thanks,

Peter

thank you very much for your fast reply. at this point, i will read the documentation, and setup a test system.

On the router, we have tried allowing wan to pass thru SIP and RTP ports. SIP is working but no sound.

I was suspecting whether do we need source natting on LAN side.

From someone that has implemented IPv6 before I can tell you that the problem is not a simple one
The protocol is different enough to make it a pain to learn
Dual stacking can be hard to troubleshoot and implementation isn't exactly strightforward
There is a pretty big lack of support for it outside of Research, Education and [some] government in the US (Asia is another story).
That said, I have successfully made the HE tunnel stuff work under pfSense from the CLI.

@eben:

Will OSPF be supported in version 2?

You could roll a package or post a bounty to add openospf as a package, currently (IIRC) the only IGP supported is RIPv2.

Nice idea, thanks. Does not fit completely what I want, but if no one has another hint on whats going wrong on my pfsense, I'll try that.

Regards

Matthias

Well since it works for everyone we can assume you missconfigured something.
http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,7001.0.html
Can you show a diagram of your setup, screenshots of your firewallrule, your balancing pools, etc.
(not the configpages themself, but the overviewpages)

http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/MultiWanVersion1.2

Remember to use the search function.

As a side note I would make a upgrade first http://blog.pfsense.org/?p=284

@sheepdawg:

Did you follow this setup? How are you configured?

http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/MultiWanVersion1.2

Yes, I followed the same setup.
Everything is working fine except loadbalancing. If primary WAN connection goes down, it shift to secondary WAN connection and vice versa. Also if both the connection are active it shows online signal in LoadBalancing Status.

afaik no.
I dont use ipsec myself so i cant say for sure, but from what i read you cannot route over ipsec.

This is possible with openVPN.
(although not with a 0.0.0.0/0 route, but with 2 routes:
0.0.0.0/1 and 128.0.0.0/1)

Perfect. I am happy to hear that.  ;)

Internally, users are using the DNS from pfSense, but I don't believe that I can specify to users connecting through on pfSense to use the pfSense DNS.  There is an option to set WINS, which I have done - but this doesn't actually seem to be any help