Yeah, I tried ee as well, similar results to VI. I figured that could do damage using a blind find/replace but I just wanted to actually boot into the system to do a factory reset. I didn't want to have to take apart the box to flash the SD card again. The script no matter what, wouldn't let me get through. I even tried using the "auto" method and it was using the same interface names I was typing with the same results.

I had a similar issue with FreePBX using the OSS End Point Device Manager. The above HTTP option worked OK with my newer Cisco VOIP phones but didn't work with some older Linksys VOIP phones. I had to revert the FreePBX back to TFTP provisioning and change the pfsense DHCP option 66 to: Number - 66 Type - Text Value - ipaddress or dnsname

Whilst a real switch will provide more bandwidth etc you can just bridge the ports to use a single subnet. Have a look here for an idea what to do: https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=48947.msg269592#msg269592 Steve

BUMP I know this is a boring as hell query but the good karma would surely be worth it, I'm dying here…  Thanks

@doktornotor: 48:F8:B3 Cisco-Linksys, LLC - what's that? That is a hidden DHCP server is what that is! Strange that it worked with the Tomato but not pfsense. That part really though me for a loop! I would have be my life that I check all the switches for such before I started. Guess I missed one. I really appreciate you guys walking me though this. Could I send ether/both of you a case of beer?

Can you describe exactly how it doesn't work?  You haven't given enough information to have a clue at all.  Are you testing from pfsense or from a LAN client?  If LAN client, are they static or DHCP?

OK fine I'm sorry for pissing off anyone. I appreciate the efforts in trying to help. I am very happy to have everything working well again!

@-RYknow: Ohh… ok. Well then, what would the answer be to that question? Maybe I should clarify that my issue is while using a VPN. If I'm not using my VPN, everything works just fine. I don't know much about pfsense at all, but in my poking around I found there is quite a number of errors that appear squid related in the firewall section. Here are a few; Jun 22 20:00:03 php: rc.filter_configure_sync: There was an error while parsing the package filter rules for /usr/local/pkg/squid.inc. Jun 22 20:00:01 php: rc.filter_configure_sync: The command '/sbin/pfctl -nf /tmp/rules.test.packages' returned exit code '1', the output was '/tmp/rules.test.packages:21: syntax error' I'm completely clueless what this all means. I haven't changed anything with squid, nor updated anything? I'm running 2.2.2 on a netgate APU. Any help would be greatly appreciated. There's been a galore of issues with Squid* on 2.2.x; obviously when your firewall rules are broken by it, it's not a good thing. Look at the reported line and see what's there. Otherwise, there's a dedicated subforum for Squid and proxy junk in general.  :P

Ha!  ;D Somewhat off topic but amusing anyway.

Obvious question, but which NIC are you trying to access the box from? Unless you've made specific changes to the rules, by default you won't be able to access the management GUI from the WAN side, only the LAN.

If you want low-cost and reasonably power-efficient, consider a refurb SFF (small form factor) PC with a Core2Duo that is at least 2GHz.  I have a 3GHz (E8400) with SSD and a dual-port Intel NIC that only pulls 38W when idle and 50-65W under load.  It cost me $75-$85.  I spent more on the refurbed dual-port Intel low-profile NIC and the SSD. There are dozens/hundreds of reburbs out there with 90 day warranties from places like NewEgg. My estimate is that the C2D 3GHz would be able to handle about 1.2-1.5 Gbps of bidirectional traffic routing.  Maybe 1/2 to 1/3 of that if used with a lot of packages or VPNs.  Since I only have a 50/50 WAN and only need about 100Mbps between the various VLANs, it's enough for the moment.

There's PPP log in Status - System Logs. Look there.

Thanks for your reply and I will use this solution

@BlazeStar: I didn't disable de DNS Resolver. I set host override IN the DNS Resolver. The DNS forwarder is not active. Should I disable de DNS Resolver and activate de DNS Forwarder ? No. The point was that you can just run one at a time. (And as I recall, the checks to prevent running both were/are somehow incomplete.)

dude who is 192.168.0.3???  Something is WRONG with that box..  Why is is talking dhcp ever couple of minutes???

Like @mer says, you should be able to achieve this with rules on your LAN(s). To keep it simple and avoid having to think hard about !this and !that I would put some pass rules first for the traffic you already say you want to let through unchecked: Pass no logging source * destination * port 80 and 443 Pass no logging source "internal DNS servers" destination * port 53 … Then: Pass with logging source * destination * and of course include block rules for anything you know you actually want to block from day 1. Then see what comes in the firewall log. Then add "pass no logging" rules for stuff you understand and want to let out. Add block rules for stuff you now understand and want to stop.

Got it working! Thanks all  :)