i understand what ure trying to do, but with that what ure trying it wont go… This is to make subnetting a bit more understanding (if this is wrong, somebody correct me please): At first, you chose /30 (255.255.255.252) subnet, wich allows a maximum of 3+1=4 hosts (252 in bin is 11111100, so u have only 2 bits for hosts), i suggest u to use /28 (240) or smth like that, because i think u have more than 4 wifi clients a ? ;) So the easyest way would be to: 1.) But a atheros based wifi card ; 2.) But a Linksys wrt54gs, flash it with dd-wrt, set it in ap mode, disable wan, connect it to lan, set it up, and select AP isolation...

depending on what you have on the wan side. you could have two vlans tagged to the wan interface. then just tag your switch on a port for  each vlan and add a port for each of your wan connections. as scott said use two differnet subnets

LOL Fair enough.  I keep thinking ppl have these units right next to them, not on a water tower!

Doubt this will work at the moment.  You're stuck with FTP on WAN1.

I think I figured it out  ;D I now know why the dumb switch was dieing… I had 2 ports that were going to the same MAC address so it froze. the way to work around that would be to spoof a Mac on the Opt1 interface so the switch thinks it is a different device and doesnt get all confused. both vlan 10 and 11 pointed to the PF box even though the 2 ports couldnt talk to eachother the switch saw 2 ports with the same MAC. Yippy it works :) my AP is just being a transparent bridge. I can access both networks on the other side. the AP isnt even on the same network (the are in the 10.x network. thx alot peeps :)

Unhook pfsense and hook your machine up to the connection to see if the connection still goes down once a day.  You need to narrow down if pfSense is the issue or not.

monitoring does not work atm so it doesn't matter. it will be used for checking if the connection is still allive. you can ping the gateway for example or even an ip of google.com. if the ping fails the connection is assumed dead and will pe temporarily taken out of the pool until the ping is successfull again.

http://www.pfsense.org/mirror.php?section=tutorials/policybased_multiwan/policybased_multiwan.pdf cover this topic in detail.

To enable voice and video communications with Windows Messenger through a non-UPnP firewall, configure the firewall to allow incoming traffic on UDP ports 5004 – 65535. For other purposes, enable the following ports: • File Transfer: tcp 6891 (to allow 10 simultaneous file transfers open ports 6891 through 6900) • Application and Whiteboard Sharing: tcp 1503 • Remote Assistance: tcp 3389

@Bunz: I understand from previous threads that the filtering bridge blocks everything unless there's a rule. I don't see this though. WAN blocks everything by default, LAN allows everything by defualt. If I set BLOCK rule on LAN Proto  Source  Port  Destination  Port  Gateway  Description  X *         *              *     *                 * *               block all I can stilll connect to 80 and ssh. there doesn't seem to be any filtering on LAN There is an anti logout rule at lan (so you don't shut down access to the webgui accidently). You can disable that at system>advanced as well.

Awesome.  I'm not aware of anyone working on this package, go for it.

Yep, unless these are two or more PPPoE-connections.

@eskild: Hi, make sure you have NAT on WAN IF, if not you will need to add static routes in the modem for your LAN and opt's. Could you please explain me what I've to do? Thanks!

This is cosmetic.  You can ignore it and it should be fixed in beta2.

I want to stick together two links as mums make it after step step DSL 4096kbit

Option 1) If you don't need a firewall go to System>advanced and shut it down completely by checking "disable firewall". This will shut down NAT and convert pfSense in a routing only platform without filtering. Option 2) If you need filtering for some reason don't check this option and go to Firewall>NAT>outbound and enable advanced outbound NAT. It will create some rules in the table below. Delete these (as you don't want NAT this will shut it down completely). Now you even can use the WAN-Interface as non natted Interface. Then create rules at all Interfaces to allow desired traffic between the subnets. Needed for both options) Add the needed routes at System>static routes. If all the other routers you don't have access to have the right routes back to you everything should work fine now.

No. Carp Loadbalancing is for sharing the load between different firewall-machines in a cluster, not for sharing the load to different WAN-gateways.

Thank`s I was thinking that can it be done with vlan`s.

on ZEUS put in 10.0.0.0/22 via 192.168.125.1 or default via 192.168.125.1 on CERBERUS put in 10.0.0.0/22 via 192.168.125.65 on DEVROUTER put in 192.168.125.0/26 via 192.168.125.65 got here a 150 km ipsec vpn between 192.168.1.0/24 with localadress 192.168.1.1 and 10.141.254.0/24 with localadress 10.141.254.254 my routes are on the 192.198.1.0/24 network: 10.141.254.0/24 via 10.141.254.254 and on the 10.141.254.0/24 network: 192.168.1.0/24 via 192.168.1.1 ping is 32 milisec if i olso had 172.178.1.0/24 beheind the 10.141.254.0/24 network then on the 192.168.1.0/24 network this route had to be add 172.178.1.0/24 via 10.141.254.254 and on the machine with 10.141.254.254 there has to be a route to 172.178.1.0/24 then and from 172.178.1.0/24 there must be a route back to 192.168.1.0/24 via the gateway that has contact with the 10.141.254.0/24 network

Nice! And sorry that I didn't catch all the details from the asciiart  ::)