You may need to check the signal strengths you're getting (Status > Wireless) it might be getting interference or who knows what. Wireless is always a PITA to debug.
That's comparing apples to oranges, it's not a good test. It would have been much less effort to setup IPsec or OpenVPN than mess with PPTP for a site-to-site link.
That said, you might also double check your other PPTP server settings. In particular, the "Server Address" should be an IP in the same subnet as "Remote Address Range".
Thanks for the info! I'll give that a try on Monday,back at the salt mines…
On the taken out Linux based firewall it does have the following static route entry:
192.168.1.0/24 gateway 192.168.10.5
It's been a while since I have even been at this building so this looks kinda funky to me as well?
It does work though?,,,:)
I'll give your suggestion a try and see if the machines & phones can work,with that configuration.
That is not traffic shaping, as you had in the original subject. It's called policy routing.
I moved the post to the multi-wan forum, but that is all covered in the Multi-WAN tutorial here:
http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Multi-WAN_Version_1.2.x
Just connect a client behind the pfSense and access the internet.
If you've set up your pools and rules using the pools correctly, you will see the traffic balanced on both WANs.
I doubt that the problem lies with the DNS forwarder itself.
The DNS forwarder just forwards DNS requests to the DNS-server you configured.
What DNS-server did you configure for the pfSense?
Did you check the box "Allow DNS server list to be overridden by DHCP/PPP on WAN".
Yes, DNS forwarder is just forwarding DNS requests but like I've mentioned previously something weird is happening. I've already tried a number of DNS servers already i.e. ISP's DNS, OpenDNS, Google's DNS, the result is the same, also unchecking/checking "Allow DNS server list to be overridden by DHCP/PPP on WAN" did not help.
A lot there to digest. :) Network design over forum doesn't tend to get a lot of responses as it's a lot to go through, especially in a network that complex.
Everything you've listed looks to be feasible. Shaping in a network that complex will be difficult or impossible pre-2.0, though this may be reasonable to deploy on 2.0 in the near future.
Lots of things involved there, more than you'll probably find detailed help with gratis. Some time with one of us could go a long way to help with the deployment (see link for support in my signature).
Exactly. I just got a response from a list from a friend who has configured this before so I will work with his settings and if that works I will post the information back here for anyone else that has this situation in the future.
Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.