well yeah its simple copy there is no magic saying oh your copy me from lan net to opt net need to change the source.. Correct yourself. Change it to optX net or whatever you rename that opt net to be... I always change mine to something that makes sense to me. wlan net, dmz net, dtv net, etc.

@jimp that's good news! I'm have researched looking for an solution and become here to post as last resort(because my english writing), fine both side are pfSense i'm happy to use it. While i will keep routing policy by hand a way statistically by adding hosts or networks according my needs. regards

Looks strange for me. That are only the states. Why don't you post packet captures, which are more informative.

when I watch the states of one of the test servers, it looks like this: LAN tcp x.x.0.96:45922 -> x.x.0.50:80 (x.x.x.148:80) CLOSED:SYN_SENT 4 / 0 240 B / 0 B This shows up multiple times, but it still receives the same error. I am not seeing it go through the gateway anymore though (Instead of LAN it used to say the GW name)

@amundae IPsec traffic selectors are not in the routing table because they are not routes. https://forum.netgate.com/topic/131420/routed-ipsec-using-if_ipsec-vti-interfaces

Yeah why not just use 1 pfsense, put your different companies on different networks and then just limit bandwidth or better just rate limit them at the switch level.

yes when you put hosts on a transit you have to route on them as well.. because hosts do not belong on a transit network only routers do..

Having pf on vm's gives another layer of redunduncy, but thats another story. Maintaining one system does have its benefits (upgrades, troubleshooting etc) And routing the packets in and out of virtual interfaces does consume unnecessary cycles. I can't tell if this has any measureable degradation whatsoever in any case. I do have second thoughts if that would work in the end, becauseit all boils down to a common routing table so traffic would never pass through the lans :(

It sounds like you do need the functionality of a managed switch. I recently went through this myself. I'm not a professional network engineer but I do understand networking reasonably well. I can help translate what the pros here are saying because I'm not one of these guys .. they know their stuff. What might help this discussion is to understand your needs a bit more clearly. How many VLANs do you anticipate? How many clients/ports do you need to support per VLAN? How are you running pfSense? Is it a Netgate appliance, home built, in a VM?

I can safely verify that in 2.4.3-RELEASE-p1 (current stable) works as it should One interface is left with the dynamicly selected monitor peer and the other pings a stable ip inside the provider (in my case the cluster ip of the main dns stack) If the provider changes her policy and blocks ping that would be an issue, but I think I can live with that. :)

Make an alias of sites that you don't want to load balance, then put a lan rule with the destination of the alias and point it to a failover group.

I wonder if this is a more prevalent bug that other people are noticing as well. I had something similar happen and I thought it was rather weird. At least the interface still shows and recognizes the gateway.

After long time of searching i figured out, that one of the upper rules (which was for outgoing traffic) was responsible for the problem. after i set it to the bottom, everithing worked fine. Thanks for your fast response Kind regards Roger

@beekay said in Pfsense and Vodafone fibrex: So I got my router to see the internet … eventually! Don't know if it is the right way, but My WAN connection is connected through VLAN - igb1.10 Now I need to sort out VPN. I can set up various VPN clients and will finish that up tonight. What I need is the router to recognize a connection to say Netflix from any device and then direct it's traffic through the US VPN client I picked. If I want to connect to another streaming site, I want the router to direct the traffic to an alternate VPN client I set up. Any other traffic which is not geo-locked, must be sent through a general VPN client in my home country. Please point me in the right direction as I do not know how to set this up. BUMP

@derelict OMG you saw it so quickly, thank you for your reply ! "beginner mistake" I don't want to pollute this forum, so you can delete this topic if you want, my problem was not really a problem in fact...

@derelict doh' I knew it would be something as dumb as that! Jeez. Thanks a lot to everyone for your help. it works now :) !!