Did you have NAT reflection on? Have you checked that the Windows boxes got the correct domain?  Do an ipconfig on your server and make sure it shows its host and DNS suffix correctly.  (Assuming it gets its IP address from pfSense as well and isn't set up as static) It may be that you have to clear the state table too under Diagnostics:States Reset states tab.  Read the notes there about your browser connection.

Maybe the default is longer than than the firewall state timer.

If you want to attempt to block torrents completely then you can check in snort there are rules already for p2p traffic. If you are just concerned of the bandwidth usage you can create a limiter for say 2mbps under Traffic Shaper > Limiter and then set that traffic shaper assigned to the firewall rules. If you use the "per ip" option you can use one set of rules for all clients.

OMG… I'm sooo embarrased. Somehow, I had the nic configuration reversed. I've set this so many times that I guess I wasn't paying close attention when configuring the nics. Strangely, it worked on the 192.168.1.X and I didn't change anything other than the lan IP. But after rebooting, I noticed that the IP's were reversed. Of course it wouldn't work. Sheese! Working like a charm now!! Thanks for all your help!!

I decided to completely reinstall pfsense and configure my settings from scratch, but the glitch still appears  ??? [image: 56B24.png]

thanks, this method works perfectly. Even without assigning an ip to the interface. And you can change the duplex setting directly in the gui! :)

OK…um.  Now what do I do?  How do I need to set up the virtual IP.  Proxy ARP?  CARP?  Other?  I started out with Alias IP.  Do I still need to set up 1:1 forwarding from the physical interface to the virtual one?

just an update, I did downgrade to R2 and it worked, today I upgraded to 2.0 release to see if it was fixed and all good. I never once changed my policy the R3 was failing … but since the release is out now I guess we consider this done! happy holiday's guys.

Thanks I'll try that setup.

Are you actually getting more than 2mbps? Is the graph going off the chart?

Yeah I did play with that today, oh well now I know.

We don't have a way to do that at the moment, but if you open a support ticket at https://portal.pfsense.org/ and ask we can see what it might take. You could grab them automatically from the box, that's covered on the doc wiki ( http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Remote_Config_Backup )

@luke240778: perfect. I'm only going to need somewhere between 5000 and 7000 anyways. In theory you then can use a /19 Netmask. This is enough for 8.192 Users. 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.31.255    8.192 IPs 192.168.32.0 - 192.168.63.255    8.192 IPs 192.168.64.0 - 192.168.95.255    8.192 IPs 192.168.96.0 - 192.168.127.255    8.192 IPs 192.168.128.0 - 192.168.159.255    8.192 IPs 192.168.160.0 - 192.168.191.255    8.192 IPs 192.168.192.0 - 192.168.223.255    8.192 IPs 192.168.224.0 - 192.168.255.255    8.192 IPs

@sathia: Hello, I noticed today that the MBUF usage has hit its limit. Apparently the site I'm running under pfsense is having some troubles too, I'd like to know if it would be safe to just I have expirienced problem like this one when I have used bridge betwen physical net interface and VLAN interface. When MBUF was full, system failed to route any packet and only restart was helpfull. Now, I have changed that to bridge betwen two physical interfaces (WAN and DMZ) and under same load, which is substantial one, I don't have any problems any more. pfSense version is 1.2.3, hardware is Intel server MB with quad core Xeon and 2 port integrated ETH + one add-on dual port intel gigabit ETH + 2 GB RAM. Br Sasa

@ermal: Can i ask why you are running those many openvpn instances? That's not an unheard of configuration, and is desirable in some circumstances. Though I've never seen it go nuts like that. Some locking or something gone awry there because of some package or something? I have done installs with 400+ server instances before without any trouble.

@luke240778: i am getting so many of them complaining about speed, If I recall correctly, you have stated elsewhere that bandwidth is expensive for you. Therefore I suspect that when customers complain about speed they might not be complaining about speed from your ISP but speed from somewhere far upstream of you (e.g. "streaming videos from Utube are very jerky".) The first problem can probably be solved relatively easily and cheaply. The second problem will be far more challenging UNLESS the issue is solely speed from the ISP. I don't recall if you have many pfSense wireless APs. If so, the Status -> Wireless page may be of interest since it reports the channel speed to associated clients. I suspect at least some other wireless APs will have similar reporting capability. @luke240778: i dont know how to insert a code box sorry.. so you will understand what i mean anyways. When composing a post click on the icon containing "#" immediately above emoticons immediately above the editing box. This will insert "code" tags in the editing box at the current cursor position. Then type the contents of the code box between the tags. Alternatively, add the contents of the code box to the text, select it, then click the icon containing "#" and the code tags will be added around the selected text. A bit of experimentation using the preview button below the editing box will give you idea. The icons above the editing box have "mouseover" hints: if you keep the mouse pointer on them for a little while they will display, in white text on a black background, hints of what they do.

Glad you got it working!  ;D

Just finished reading and testing dhcrelay…. it seems there is only one target possible. It would seem the tabs are for enabling on a per interface basis. The server field is a general field it seems. Sorry to have bothered you guys... should have read before I ask... Peter