I've been thinking about open VPN but Isn't this going to low down my speed. After all the hotspot's speed is low enough. Yes BlueKobold I am using Kali linux but It came the time that I am sorry that I never get deep into Linux this stupid windows each year become more more privacy nightmare specially now windows 10. I will probably keep using Kali for a time been I just waned to see if it is a good idea to setup virtual box with PFSENSE Thanks to all

That something can be technically done might be not even the best to realize it really. So if I had to be true fully to you I would aware of such a set up like yours. In service networks from TIER1,2,3 or smaller or locally homed ISPs this could be done and is often offered as a service but based on totally other hardware devices and on top of this surely based on faster and more stable connections or uplinks. You as a company are using a customer network but this named above carriers or ISPs are driving this through their service network and then it is more stable and on this stage it makes sense. I want when the QinQ connection is established,computer2  get the ip from the DHCP Pool on PF1.How can i do this? QinQ VLANs are Layer2 based and the entire WAN through the Internet will be a routet way so it could really be, that you will be having success with a L2TP/IPSec VPN connection or a BGP connection betwenn this two points, but I personally would recommend the following. Let the QinQ VLANs end at there WAN end point that might be the border firewall, border router or a gateway at a network edge or node and than connect the both networks over one or more VPN or BGP connections and thats it.

Why could you not just fire up a 2nd instance of vsftp have it listen on the IP your sending your want/internet users to with the passive setup to use your public ip.  And a second instance listen on different rfc1918 address where your local clients go. Or as hinted upon just use a secure method of file transfer like sftp that only uses 1 port and there you go no issues, and now your secure!!  And all you have to do is forward 1 port on pfsense. ftp has been antiquated for YEARS, anyone still using it just nuts or lazy… There are FREE sftp clients for any user of any OS to use, there is FREE servers, shit any linux distro out there comes with it.  You can do it on windows now for free as well. So what could be the excuse of still trying to use a unsecure antiquated protocol like ftp?

I had the same problem before, but I solve it here's how i solve it. make sure you're on the same network with all of your unifi AP then run the unifi controller try to adopt all of the AP it it not work, hard reset all your AP and try to adopt them again if still not work, try unifi discover (you can download it from ubnt.com) to adopt it if some of your AP is isolated, use the wireless uplink from the nearest/strongest signal

As promised: https://www.infotechwerx.com/blog/Creating-a-Simple-pfSense-Bridge

Mine currently works 1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  pfsense.localdomain [192.168.1.1]   2    2 ms    2 ms    3 ms  xxx   3    14 ms    13 ms    14 ms  xe-10-0-0.bar2.Minneapolis2.Level3.net [4.59.66.5]   4    38 ms    38 ms    39 ms  ae-21-52.car1.Denver1.Level3.net [4.69.147.99]   5  103 ms  105 ms  127 ms  ae-21-52.car1.Denver1.Level3.net [4.69.147.99]   6    66 ms    70 ms    73 ms  CENIC.car1.Denver1.Level3.net [4.30.24.58]   7    74 ms    73 ms    73 ms  198.83.83.5   8    67 ms    67 ms    67 ms  208.77.78.190   9    69 ms    69 ms    68 ms  bldg116-0020.unm.edu [129.24.192.30] 10    *        *        *    Request timed out. 11    68 ms    68 ms    69 ms  unm.edu [129.24.168.32]

Routed subnet as I said before.

I already bought the Intel, I didn't want to risk it. I can't find any topics on it over other NICS, is it just the support?

For safety reasons (IPMIs have awful security track records), I'd disable the NIC sharing where you have a dedicated IPMI port on the hardware. We do that on the systems we sell where that's applicable. If it's hardware that only has a shared port IPMI, use that port for your LAN rather than WAN as OP did.

It's a new device so one can try it on the bench while the old one is in service. ezpz.

;) ;)Thanks man , but sorry for late reply it worked

i did check my hard drive and no bad sectors or nothing wrong with it as per the attached so please would you clarify in more details what i can i do to solve this bug and avoided totally  

Hi John, thank you for your reply. For the WAN: right now there is no WAN on these servers. they aren't allowed to go to Internet. Right now the default gateway of these servers is the core switch were all the vlans are pointing as default gateways. Should I still use this as Default gateway on pfsense? by doing this I don't have any WAN but only a LAN with a default gateway, correct? thank you a lot best regards Nick

[2.2.6-RELEASE][admin@pfsense.bhf.net]/root: ps ax | grep 'url' 42622  -  Is      0:00.00 /usr/local/bin/minicron 86400 /var/run/update_alias_url_data.pid /usr/local/sbin/fcgicli -f /etc/rc.update_alias_url_data 42800  -  I        0:00.00 minicron: helper /usr/local/sbin/fcgicli -f /etc/rc.update_alias_url_data  (minicron) 85776  0  S+      0:00.00 grep url 86400 = one a day for me. It's set up from config.xml - and put here /etc/crontab …... (I guess).

thats possible. i'm not experienced enough to debug a packetcapture & find out if it's a DoS attack. some of the members or developers here might be able to help you out

Encountering a similar error. I have a blank VM that can find PXE server but TFTP sends errors: PXE-T01: File not found PXE-E3B: TFTP error - File not found PXE-M0F: Exiting Intel PXE ROM pfsense is configured as shown in attachment. [image: pxe.JPG] [image: pxe.JPG_thumb]