Thanks again, you are my hero!

Site to site VPNs should never be bridged, that's a bad network design that's begging for problems. Not related to the problem, but I'd stop trying to fix something that shouldn't be done, and put a proper routed setup in place.

I have solved one issue.  To get Host C to route 10.224.34.0/24 over OpenVPN for the 10.111.79.0/24 network I had to go to make changes in the outbound tab (Firewall->NAT->Outbound).  I changed it to manual and added an OpenVPN rule.

However the issue were I can not pint 10.224.34.254 from the 10.111.79.0/24 network remains.  I believe this is probably due to some pfsense setting on that particular box.  Although I am not sure what else to move since I have already removed  "Block private networks" (Interfaces->WAN).

Another issue that has since developed, is that I am sometimes able to ping and sometimes not if I turn on an OpenVPN Server on HOST C.

For Instance if I am on any of the the computers on 10.111.79.0/24 , I can ping 10.224.34.2, 10.224.34.100, 10.224.34.107, and 10.224.34.109.

If I then go to (VPN->OpenVPN-Server) and I enable the server. I will sometimes lose pings to some of the 10.224.34.0/24 IPs , but it's not permanent.  Randomly, they some times work.  If I keep trying to ping them at different times some IPs will reply.  During this setup however I can still SSH into any of those machines.  Which means OpenVPN is still sort of working.  There is nothing special about my server config, I did use a different tunnel network, Diffrent CA and certificates.  This is my personal office network that I would sometimes like to access when I am somewhere else.

I solved it.

Anyone running into this problem:

On SERVEER PFSENSE you new to enable advanced routing(AON).
On that screen once you activate you will see rules. Copy the rule for open vpn, and replace it wil the IP range of PCs behind the Pfsense  client.
Unline DD-WRT, pfsense does not do NAT on OpenVPN which is great :-)

The OpenVPN server is the same as on other distributions. There is no (major) difference between. The only advantage I see on pfsense is the GUI which is easy to use and you do not hneed extra hardware, extra port forward because all is on the same machine. And you can easily see which user is logged in, you can enable firewall logging on this user, you can discconect a user and so on.

It seems that you have:
WAN IP 192.168.1.50/24 - gateway 192.168.1.1
LAN IP 192.168.1.2/24
Normally there are bigger problems than VPN when I accidentally get WAN and LAN subnets the same. Usually I can't even access the WebGUI from LAN.
First thing is to make your LAN a different subnet - e.g. 192.168.2.1/24
Then the ordinary routing will work, and maybe when the VPN connects it will do something useful.
If you want/need to access your pfSense from what is its WAN side (which is actually behind your other router and cable modem), then you can easily add pass rules on WAN to do that.

In this config you can't access from pfsense subnet to dd-wrt router to manage via web or ping, only telnet.
But some code maybe added to dd-wrt router firewall script:

iptables -I INPUT 3 -i tun0 -p icmp -j ACCEPT
iptables -I INPUT 1 -i tun0 -p tcp –dport 80 -j ACCEPT

and saved.

Given that none of those log entries indicate it fully established a connection, I'd say you're either pointing it at the wrong server IP, the firewall rules on the server end are blocking the traffic, or something in between is blocking the traffic.

That does sound like the kind of things we see where switches or related gear refuse to talk outside their own subnet.

I was on a conference call with a customer last week with them and their switch vendor and even though they had everything set correctly (gateway, subnet mask, etc) and the switch vendor said there were no such filters, it still refused to allow access to the switch GUI from outside its own subnet.

Add a little manual outbound NAT on that interface to make the traffic going to those devices appear to originate from its own subnet and it works fine.

Thanks guys, I too was missing the static route back into the vpn subnet. It works great now with using just the wan interface.

it is certainly possible to set it up that way.

personally i just create a openvpn instance for each site. In case of trouble/other configuration/new routes/… i only want the site involved to temporary lose it's connection and not every site connected.

One or more certificates weren't generated correctly. Upgrade to 2.x and use the built-in cert manager, it's much, much easier to generate certs with.

Yes.
As long as you dont have overlapping subnets in the different locations it will be no problem.
Just make sure that you have in all places the correct routes.

it works now! thx!

Where exactly are you using pfSense in your setup? If it is a general question about OpenVPN or VNC you may find more users that can help you in the OpenVPN forums [1], TightVNC mailing-list [2] or UltraVNC forum [3].

[1] https://forums.openvpn.net/
[2] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vnc-tight-list
[3] https://forum.ultravnc.net/

you had the OpenVPN server or client bound to a virtual IP that needs to be changed to one of your new ISP's IPs.
How can I make changes to it?

your firewall rule permitting traffic to the OpenVPN server instance from the client instance now has the wrong source or destination IP (depending on whether the server or client side changed).
We didn't specify the rule for outgoing connection so it's pretty much open. Source * to Destination *

your client config needs to change server IPs to the new ISP, if the server side is the one that changed.
The source IP is changing, how can I change the server IP on the client side?