I figured if the feature was there I'd take advantage of it, but if it's that unreliable I'll figure something else out.

@mikeisfly: If it's 2.2 beta then I believe there a problem there. I have had issues as well. If you are running 2.1.5 then it should be pretty straight foward. Exact, we are awaiting for the fix in 2.2beta.

Disregard, fixed the issue at hand. Turned out when the VPN client was initially setup, the interface was assigned to the LTE connection rather than ANY and therefore everything was being forced through that route.  This wasn't an issue when the LTE was the only choice.

Did you fix this?

Goto System -> Routing -> Gateways choose  Gateway and increase Latency Threshold and Package Loss Threshold (maybe even "Down") to e.g. 300-2000 ms and see if it helps….

Why not put your publics on your router. Then setup a p2p (/30) between pfsense and your exterior router. Then put private behind pfsense using the switch for your lan(s). You didn't mention what type of router your using but you should easily be able to send pfsense traffic out of one public and use the other public for what you want. How many ports on your router?

Yeah, after dicking about in the BusyBox on the ubiquities and scratching my head over the routing nonsense I think I'm going to go with the approach you laid out. Its waaaaay simpler. Its just a little annoying since I've got the VLAN my LAN side port to make that happen. I'm planning to upgrade to a pfsense box with more than 3 physical NICs and when I do that I can just wire it up direct then.

Multi-WAN can be used for backup Internet connections, load balancing (to get more throughput overall), to provide services on different ISPs, or many other scenarios. The configuration is covered on the doc wiki here: https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Multi-WAN_2.0 There is more detailed information available in the book at all, which can be obtained by purchasing a Gold Subscription

Actually I am not sure about how to use that PUTTY software…  ??? I am looking where to change the default settings for the OPT-ports right now. I am also looking where to make the ICMP-settings.

All sorted…. ....Gateway groups were messed up for some reason.

Hey, Veyron! The best analogy for your scenario is actually already been sticked on top of this sub-forum (Load Balancing - The Very Basic!). Basically, what you are trying to do is Link Aggregation which isn't what Multi-WAN 2.0 is meant to do. Taken from the documentation… "As with previous multi-wan guides, this setup enables pfSense to load balance or fail over traffic from your LAN to multiple internet connections (WANs). With load balancing, traffic from the LAN is shared out on a round robin basis across the available WANs. With failover, traffic will go out the highest priority WAN until it goes down, then the next is used. pfSense monitors each WAN connection, using either the gateway IP or an IP address you provide, and if the monitor fails it will remove that WAN from use." https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Multi-WAN_2.0 I will spare you the technical jargon, but every time you initiate a file download on the internet it creates a single session specific to your computer (whether it is HTTP, FTP, etc.). Multi-WAN is meant to give you load balanced based on these sessions (there is A LOT more to it than that, but I am keeping it simple). This session cannot be split by WAN links for reasons that are very technical. The only application protocol I am aware of that can aggregate multiple WAN links is BitTorrent. Strictly speaking, I am not certain how SpeedTest is producing those results. Theoretically, Multi-WAN should assign the download test to one connection or the other (most likely the 100/10).

Hi. I had the same problem and i think i can help. You must have a network card to connect the ethernet cable from your ISP (obviously :P). Then, you must configure a new interface in pfsense, name it WAN or WAN2 and associate it to your new installed card. There's no need to configure any parameters on this interface. Then, create a vlan with the tag id that your isp provides. Enter the parameters of your ISP and it must work… Let me know if it worked. Greetings.

Hi, I wonder whether pfSense has / will soon have a feature allowing VPN bonding?

I was just trying to provision a customer on a 200Mbit metro-ethernet.  I like to bridge this circuit from WAN to bridge interfaces so I have some minimal control.  Speed tests about 120Mbit. Passed the same VLAN to the outside switch (same as is connected to the metro-ethernet) and the same customer gear and I get 180-190Mbps. Bridging has its place, but it also has its costs. For this customer, I let them connect directly to the outside switch since I know they have a clue.  For others, they deal with the suboptimal performance, which is probably 4-5x what they will ever need in their wildest dreams. Postulate: A pfSense bridge will never perform as well as a good managed switch.  Take it to the bank. Even of the switch is a TrendNet or similar it will be better.  One more feather in the cap of my "why does pfSense even attempt to support wireless adapters" question. I <3 pfSense

arduino what you have done is slightly different then what Derelict suggest: in your senario all untagged traffic will go to your parent interface and only the tagged traffic will go to vlan 100. What I would then try is tagging both WANS like Derelict suggest. Not a good idea to have both tagged and untagged traffic on the same interface I have seen undesired effects with PfSense like with Captive portal. This should work as I have don't this in my lab setup using a switch as a WAN focal point so I can then bring 1 connection into my pfSense Box. I guess it might depend on the kind of NIC that you are using too. I try to use Intel or Broadcom if possible.

Dan pretty easy for what you want to do. Firsts when you get the DSL connection create a routing group with fail over that way when your DSL goes down all traffic will be routed out of your wireless connection. Then on your LAN rules make sure you have above your any any rule a rule that tells pfsense to send all of your FreePBX traffic out of the DSL connection. The last thing you need to do is go to your NAT Setting -> outbound and change it over to manual. All the rules that you have in place for automatic should be created when you do that so don't worry. Then add a rule that says something like what I have attached. I have created a alias from my Freepbx server so that way if I make a change to my IP network I don't have to change the rules. The rule that you see below is for my plex server but should be very similar to what you want to do. The last thing that I will tell you is that I'm using Pfsense 2.1.5 64bit. I have tried this setup on pfsense 2.2 but the port forwarding rules coming inbound are not working. I'm not sure what is going on with that so I downgraded to the latest stable version. The problem has been reported but I don't think that the developers think it's a issue. I will be testing 2.2 later but needed my setup to work since it's my production home network. Hope this helps.    

You need to go to /interfaces_ppps.php and select your interfaces there. Then go to /interfaces_assign.php  and for WAN select the pppoe interface you just set up.  Mine is ppp0e1