Do these linksys cards have atheros chips on them?
Generally you will have the fewest problems with ath cards.

So basing on what your saying, i can just keep adding interfaces on the assign page, and keep adding, until i cannot support any more? I dont want to make crazy assumptions, im guessing the additional WAN cards are going to be named OPT3 OPT4 etc etc right?

Yes thats right.
You can add as many interfaces as you can (physically limited).

so basicaly, your trying to connect to multiple hotel AP's and then route this into a wifi card to broadcast it so you can then use a laptop or another device to connect to the box? It sounds a good idea, pretty simmilar to what im attempting to setup. good luck with it. If I have any info that could help, il let you know.

thx alot for fast reply. maybe i'll try v2.0-alpha tomorrow!

bye,
robert k.

Huiii, a bit sensitive today.

This forum provides an excellent search function.
http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?action=search

Also there are stickies which explain the most basic stuff and link to the documentation.
http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,7001.0.html

Also on the mainpage of the pfSense there are the links to the documentation:
http://doc.pfsense.org
http://faq.pfsense.org

There are some good tutorials…
http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Tutorials

What do you expect?
Do you think people are not getting a bit brusque if the same questions are asked over and over and over again?
You should read this: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html and then find out what in your original post was wrong, that you got such an answer. (Also my post wasnt intended condescending, but that's explained in this link as well ;) )
(Although i have to say to your credit, that you provided a diagram which is waaaay more than most people bother with :D )

@dotdash:

This would be easier if you just used the IPs from the second block as Virtual IPs. Is there a compelling reason you need public IPs on the DMZ machines?

(apologies on late reply)

Some of the servers gets confused with virtual ips.  TrixBOX (asterisk pbx software) can have problems because of how sip works.  Also just to mainly make things "simpler" in that I ssh to the same ip that's the public ip and works without having to remember two ips or set up custom dns aliases and stuff. I was able to just create a second dmz interface and got it to work that way.

There are a large number of articles about VLANs on the Internet, and if you use the "Search" button above you'll find many posts.  Heck, if you take a look at the FAQs in the Documentation you'll find something ;)

Read the FAQ and documentation again.

The loadbalancer in pfSense balances the connections.
It doesnt actually sum up the bandwidth you have.
If you want to see the full bandwidth of all links together, get a download manager which is capable of creating multiple connections for the same file you download.

Confirmed! 1.2.3RC1 is also routing broadcast packets when load balancer is configured.

Ok, may be it happens because on pfSense1 I have
pass in quick on em2 reply-to (em2 10.29.254.254) inet from <flttornoc>to any keep state label "USER_RULE: Allow All for FLT TOR NOC"
pass in quick on carp1 reply-to (em2 10.29.254.254) inet from <flttornoc>to any keep state label "USER_RULE: Allow All for FLT TOR NOC"

carp1 has VIP3 (on em2)
10.29.254.254 is VIP4(and default gateway for em2 on pfSense1)
<flttornoc>represents em2 subnet.

I know that now GruensFroeschli will advice me to use google, but honestrly i tried and as newbe to pf I still have questions:

I understand route-to, but what exactly does reply-to mean? can I add specific rule for my PC2 to create something like this?
pass in quick on em2 inet from <pc2>to any keep state label "USER_RULE: Allow All for FLT TOR NOC"

Thanks.</pc2></flttornoc></flttornoc></flttornoc>

Thank you wtsexton
This seems to work and all is well. The reconfiguring of the rules did the trick. Dotdash and Jahonix your assistance and responses were appreciated and helped tremendously.

@dimsion:

Problem:

I'm able to get all the servers to go out on WAN1 and i can see that each server going out with it own public ip i have set for them in NAT1:1, however I'm not able to get the computer 192.168.1.100 and 192.168.1.101 to go out on WAN2. I'm missing something?

You seem to have the correct rule (the second LAN Rule).  Try replacing the source directly as 192.168.1.0/24.  Set the type to Network and put in the address range directly.

Did i ask this question wrong? Any one have any thoughts?

I followed the model used at: http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/HOWTO_setup_vlans_with_pfSense

You must use the latest pre-sp2 release in the eko directory. It is more stable than the sp1 "stable" release.  dd-wrt isn't quite stable as it loses connectivity/locks up sometimes possible memory leaks.  I only used it for testing multi-wan….  What a pain!!  Get yourself a smart/managed 10/100Mbps used switch..  They are often thrown away by companies/government agencies...  They're considered "obsolete" by many now.  Save yourself the headache....  If you do plan on testing it, use buffalo's and wrt54g(l) routers w/ 4-8MB flash / 16-32MB ram.  If you need only dual wan, the ezplanet mod of dd-wrt is quite stable, though you need a 8/32MB router.

good luck...

@Megastar:

i can't even ping 192.168.90.1 (which is pfsense interface address on lan2) from my client 192.168.90.10 .   In order to do this, and to access internet, i have to change gateway field in the rule from loadbalance to default. But in this case, no load balancing anymore, just primary wan is used to go outside.  Really odd…

It's is not odd it's normal. Just insert one rule before the last one "allow icmp from LAN2net to 192.168.90.1 using 'default' gateway" and you will be able to ping it.

Hi. Check the configuration of your router netgear first.

jigp
Davao City