@wallabybob:

Perhaps Disabling pfSense option Allow intra-BSS communication will achieve something like AP isolation mode in DD-WRT (I know little about DD-WRT).

Exactly, this is the same option.

Steve

@shafqat1991:

client got just 12 kbps or max 20 kbps

Not sure if you mean bits or bytes here since you also said:
@shafqat1991:

and i got full speed like 800 to 900 plus kbps.

900kBps (kilo Bytes per second) would be approximately 8Mbps (mega bits per second).
Anyway with that sort of difference the first thing I would look for is a duplex mismatch or cabling problem. If you have the Bullet connected directly to pfSense this could easily happen and 12kBps is exactly the sort of speed I would expect to see.

Steve

Edit: Reading this it appears as though autonegotiation of line speed and dulplex is not the default setting.

what was the solution to this coz same issue for me since a very long time now

As I said they are 'regular expressions' used in unix and other OS's. Many OS's use a subset of the main expressions. A Google search for them will reveal many examples.

regular-expressions-cheat-sheet.png
regular-expressions-cheat-sheet.png_thumb

My experience was MAC spoofing and VLAN tagging does not work together.  To work around my problem I set the spoofed MAC address that I wanted my cable modem to see from my WAN interface, inside the VM setup inside VMware and removed the spoofed MAC address from pfSense.  This way pfSense sees and uses my spoofed MAC at boot time as if it was a MAC address on a physical NIC.  My cable modem sees and locks to my spoofed MAC and all 3 WAN interfaces works correctly on separate VLAN's on the same physical interface.

This setup has been working fine for a week now.  I finally have IP's on all three WAN interfaces with the cable modem locked to the MAC address I need it to use.

Thanks to everyone for all your suggestions!

what exactly are you setting up?

Every method you can use there is easy to get around, control at the switch level if it's a wired network is generally the best if not only way to prevent such things.

NP, glad to help.  :D

Even if it just made you look at it again.

I would have kicked myself tho,  ??? annoying when u miss one thing.

i read the multiwan configuration for PfSense 2.0 ( http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Multi-WAN_2.0 )

and applied the same gateway group for the squid users. and  am not using transparent squid, anyway i will do that configuration and update soon.

@mibovrd:

I take it the LAN interface is similar, with no collisions, etc.
Any mbuf errors in syslog? type in mbuf in the filter at the bottom. I had an issue with a realtek gig card that I added for an opt interface. I think my issue was running too many Gig cards on a PCI interface, and I had similar problems, a little more frequent than yours though. Need PCIe or x for Gig cards really.
I would Google for the intel and realtek chipset models cards to see if there are any issue that might require tweaks, there are a few that have issues. More with Realtek than Intel, but intel has some too. I would try Google pfSense 2.0.1 + chipset model numbers and then FreeBSD 8.1 + chipset model numbers.

Nothing shows up when I apply a filter for mbuf in Status: System logs: System

Thank you for the input. I'll research more into the chipsets.

Anyone use any other tools?

I am running a SmokePing test as well. NY looks interesting, have a look.

http://www.dslreports.com/r3/smokeping.cgi?target=network.0e4309b87aadaaef433745f5ccdd14ce

Edit:
Tests are done. Looks like route through NY is the worst. For the overall test through NY, it looks to be about over 2% packet loss. The others were slightly better.

No, mbuf errors and the WAN interface doesn't show any errors.

Based on this, it doesn't appear that the problem is on my end, but how can I be sure?

Media 100baseTX <full-duplex>In/out packets 21190740/20936341 (17.38 GB/1.62 GB)
In/out packets (pass) 20936341/14416830 (17.35 GB/1.62 GB)
In/out packets (block) 254399/0 (29.57 MB/0 bytes)
In/out errors 0/0
Collisions 0</full-duplex>

It turned out that also the "libpng.so.6" was missing, after transferring the files with pscp (from a virtual installation) it seems the graphs are live again.

@dhatz:

"symmetric NAT" (more) i.e. the most restrictive (and secure) type of NAT.

Wow, 100% pure information on that page. I just discovered I knew nothing.
Thanks Dhatz.  :)

Steve

I have similar crashes with PPPoE client (WAN) from time to time (sometimes it is up and running for 80+ days), for me it looks like there is common problems with  PPP in pfsense. I did not reported them as it always reported in redmine. Those kernel panics are related to PPPoE reconnection in most cases.

Huh, that is not something I would have thought of.
Weird.  ::)

Steve

This will help for a start, eh?

http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Asterisk_VoIP

ohh i want to use:

squid and as parent havp anti virus

and

load-balancing with failover

ON ONE machine! ;)

No NAT reflection is the correct way to do this if you are using a URL to access an internal server.
The Winbox software appears to use it's own dynamic DNS lookup somehow so this would probably apply.
http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Why_can%27t_I_access_forwarded_ports_on_my_WAN_IP_from_my_LAN/OPTx_networks%3F

Steve

Edit: I can't find where I read that about WinBox and DNS now.

Yes it can do that.
However it's likely to to take a little playing around with the configuration to get it doing what you need. Still if you've got £12K to save that could be worthwhile!
What exactly do you mean by 'AD reporting'?
If you mean running a webproxy that each user has to login to authenticated against Active Directory then you may struggle to get exactly what you want. It can be done though, via captive portal and freeradius for example.

In my opinion the one part of pfSense you are likely to find lacking is logging/reporting. pfSense can export all it's logs to external reporting software though.

If you have VM servers setup then I suggest installing it and having a play around.

Steve