From that many versions back I would just reinstall to 2.7.2 and restore the config.
But what IP does it get? A private IP from the modem?
You can set the dhcp client to reject leases from the modem server IP to prevent that. Cable modems will comonly hand out their own leases until the line syncs.
I expect it to be in the Hyper-V setup. Though the NIC itself would probably need to be in promiscuous mode to pass tagged and untagged traffic. The Guest VM shouldn't see the VLAN tagging at all. Though you could probably set that up in a few different ways.
I don't run Hyper-V so I can't help you with it directly.
@Ratfink Connecting two sites with Wireguard VPN is absolutely doable, and you don't even need fixed IP's for it to work.
When you say you have 5 fixed IP's from your ISP, I'm kind of assuming you have your office at your house? Meaning they are both connected to the same fibre? Otherwise, if they are at very different locations, is it still the same ISP?
In terms of getting the IP's on the respective pfsense machines, I assume you know how or have instructions from the ISP to do this. Might be MAC based if DHCP for example...
Anyway, running pfsense on repurposed HW is very common and can be done "barebone" or virtualized. So you shouldn't have any problems getting to to work on your rack servers, hopefully.
So step one is of course getting both machines up and running. And since they will be for different sites and connected via VPN you must make sure to use different LAN subnets on them. Like 192.168.1.0/24 on one and 192.168.2.0/24 on the other.
Once you have them up and running you can follow a guide like one of these to set up wireguard.
Even though you have fixed IP's it might be a good idea to get two domains, unless you already have that.
@Gblenn Did you knwo you can do this:
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/how-can-i-prevent-automatic-updating-a-specific/9967b1cf-dc6f-495d-82be-4ab3f3207ff1
Thanks for the tip but that is not the issue, and it didn't help. Every time after a shut down and start of the PC I cap out at 2-2.5 in speedtest (only download however).
What is interesting however, is that I now tested with iperf and get the full 9.44 Gbit... so what is it that speedtest does differently, or fast.com for that matter?
1 unifi dream machine pro controller with 20 access points connected with it, In lab if more than 400 users get connect, it got crashed all connected users faced disconnectivity. 1200 users is actual limit as advised by unifi support team.
actually we need to connect more than 2000 users at a time and 5 controllers is not a solution
@stephenw10 Thanks so much for all your time and patience, but I finally admitted defeat and gave up. I canceled the Verizon service today and will be returning the gateway device shortly.
I'd love to track down the gremlins and eventually switch away from my horrible DSL provider, but the trial I was on was about to expire, and I was out of time to screw with it for now.
Maybe one day I'll try it again, possibly with T-Mobile home internet, which I think it also in my area. I've heard they will be making it easier to 'bridge' their gateway device soon, so that might be an option.
I really do appreciate all your help, sorry we couldn't come up with a real solution!
@Antibiotic Ok , finally I think found correct settings with VPN interfaces. Waveform measuring looks like incorrectly upload speed, Ookla speed test show me correct
1GB upload speed and 1GB download. Have A+))) , without Limiters have B or C. Tested grade on all inerfaces with VPN and without VPN only clear WAN. All looks good grade A+ tested also with a proxy squid also A+. This my final settings Limiters as from official docs and floating rule as below:
No it shouldn't lock up the system entirely. You might end up blocking all ICMP traffic depending on how the limiter is configured. That could potentially block gateway monitoring etc.
