@Derelict: Draw your network.  It'll probably be obvious if you do that. Thats the problem…  Both networks are very simple...  Flat networks, only one switch, both have identically configured pfSense routers. My hard-wired machine has the ip: 10.1.2.100.  My laptop (wireless) has the IP 10.1.2.101.  Desktop can access the NAS, laptop can't.  If I attach the laptop to the switch, and even use the same IP it works. This is why I think it's my Wireless AP, but there's nothing special there either.  It's a Rucks Wireless 7363, nothing strangely configured.  I have another AP here that I can swap out and test.

@doktornotor: You won't expose anything in the first place unless you allow UDP/123 access on WAN. Consider it to be an option flaw if the WAN selection does not establish the necessary rules.

Glad that it works. ;)

Ok, so I left PFSense connected to my ISP router all night. Today I go check on it and its working. Most likely it was PFSense taking 2 centuries to update the routing table. Thank you to everyone with their tips even though we didn't achieve the intended result :)

Well, with the horrible polling option, 2.1.x vs. 2.2.x vs. 2.3.x makes just no difference. The option shouldn't exist in the GUI.

I´ve got it in my pfsense as ptt says diagnostics –> smart status -->select option "info", device "ada0" pres "View" and brings me this info: === START OF INFORMATION SECTION === Device Model:    SAMSUNG SV0842D Serial Number:    0158J1FN367480 Firmware Version: MB100-33 User Capacity:    8,455,200,768 bytes [8.45 GB] Sector Size:      512 bytes logical/physical Device is:        Not in smartctl database [for details use: -P showall] ATA Version is:  ATA/ATAPI-4 T13/1153D revision 17 Local Time is:    Fri Sep 25 14:56:36 2015 UTC SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability. SMART support is: Disabled U must have SMART compatibility, support or capabilities (excuse me, don´t remember the specific term) enabled on BIOS. Regards

@charliem: Well, my machines have worked OK with that patch since before I posted it.  No known breakage, but I guess I don't count as a second opinion :) Your first opinion is appreciated regardless. :) Wasn't clear from your earlier post if you were running it at all at the time, or were still running it now 6 months after the fact.

When I meant to capture decrypted traffic to your lan I figured you would be sniffing on a span port somewhere.  But if you sniff on pfsense lan you should see all traffic in and out of that interface.

I have several builds with this case using LSI SAS controller and NAS4Free. They are nice and cheap. http://www.amazon.com/Norco-ITX-S4-Mini-ITX-Computer-Storage/dp/B00J353KH8 You really only bought a drive box, Not a NAS.

@cmb: @Harvy66: Why wouldn't it exceed 1Gbps? With the nature of how those counters work, it isn't possible to exceed the link speed of the interface if you're getting sane values. @burdandrei: Thanks @cmd, will do. i restarted the firewall, and looks like it stopped.  I got status tgz before and after, will open the ticket when i'll have more info Thanks, curious to see that. So even if the actual link speed is faster than the reported link speed? It's not a common situation, but this is one of them.

@fraglord: How do I connect from a remote client to the ser2net port? Connect via VPN (external) or SSH (internal) to the pfSense box and then you could connect over the ser2net application to the ports directly.

Ah ok thats for the reply. Kinda sucks but i guess ill just use the watchguard as a training tool with pfsense until i actually build a pfsense computer.