@jimp: pkg_add -r lrzsz Then use lrz to start a zmodem receive. Awesome! Thank you, -A

As an update: I THINK ive resolved this….wasnt PfSense causing this at all, it was TMG. "strict RPC compliance" was on. Turn it off, and thus far, works fine, as well as fixing a few other minor issues which i assume use RPC or DCOM. Im still testing but it'll be hilarious if a protocol that MS products rely on to work, is "broken" by a MS product too. :p

You could go internet > TOR > PFSENSE > LAN Clients. The TOR box could be either a small cheap/old stand alone computer you put between pfsense and the internet or you could get TOR up and running inside pfsense.  The last option isn't supported out of the box. I'm sure VPN providers are no more likely to protect your privacy than facebook is.

haha. I glossed over the "If I plug a laptop into the port and manually set the LAN ip on the laptop with one of the public ip's it works great." Yes.  Static IP.  However, I'm wondering about his 8 IPs since he will only get one if he doesn't take steps to see all 8? I see a nice youtube video on that here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrBr0N0WrTY

@stephenw10: The box should remain responsive though. Responsive - not really. Was barely recoverable by reverting to previous config via serial console.

Not enough of the exchange to really tell from that, but probably a difference such as PAP vs CHAP or other settings in the RADIUS server that govern what it claims to support. It could also be a difference in the compile-time options given to freeradius and not in the config file.

They may not timeout, mine don't under normal use. There's an easy fix anyway.  :) Steve

when you boot into single user mode, do: fsck -y -t ufs / fsck -y -t ufs / (yes, twice) mount -a -t ufs pwd_mkdb -p /etc/master.passwd

Thank you both for your answer, I will digest it  ;D

Great!! Thank you!!

@stephenw10: It's handled by the FreeBSD lagg(4) interface which can do both loadbalancing and failover (and some other stuff). It's worth noting though that it acheives the extra bandwidth by load-balancing the two connections. Thus to see any benefit you need to have multiple IP connections running across it. In your case that shouldn't be a problem because in routing between two VLANs via pfSense you will always have two streams connections. Steve I actually have a total of 5 VLANs that use the pfSense box as a gateway– 2 on one interface, 3 on the other. I guess I should leave them separate rather than mess with combining them and possibly creating other issues. shrug

Ok thank you for your help Kind regards

Looks like it has an RJ45 console port, presumably serial. Edit: Yep, 9K6 serial connection. Steve

Also, whichever end is the OpenVPN server will need to have a known public IP address so the client can connect. If one of you already has a static IP, then use that for the server end. Otherwise you will have to sign up to a dynamic DNS service. pfSense can keep the dynamic DNS name up-to-date with the current IP address of your OpenVPN server end - Services->Dynamic DNS.

Nothing changed with scheduling cron jobs since 2006. (You can install cron package to do this via GUI.)

Ah, yes you're right. Traffic between two hosts in the same subnet will not pass through the pfSense box. However you may want to, for example, separate your wifi clients from wired using an additional interface in which traffic would have to be routed. Steve