There was no problem with the line … did a new installation from 2.0 to 2.01 and everything was ok again ??

In general, yes that will cause significant Internet connectivity problems in almost every circumstance, you need to get rid of the IP conflict.

I was able to control my voip qos issues by using the soproxd package which I actually installed for another reason. The "qos" settings (Ill call them) seem to have made a huge difference for my office. May or may not be an option for you. But for reference…  http://cable-dsl.navasgroup.com/#Asymmetry Are you using a cable gateway (has own router) device at the office location? Or just a bridge?

Check "LAGG" on the Docs: http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/LAGG_Interfaces

pfSense is not a content filter and web reporting system. Squid can authenticate against AD, so you can get much of the functionality found in commercial UTMs by installing squid (proxy) + squidguard (filter) + lightsquid (reporting), but it won't be a tightly-integrated system. Personally, I don't think this functionality belongs on a router/firewall.

Hi podilarius, I have change the exports options on the nfs server. Br, Vukomir

@marcelloc: @mousehat: Hi! How can i clear IMSpector Logs? Example i want to clear a certain date of logs only, is it possible? thanks in advance take a look on /var/imspector pfsense dir sorry im a newbie, what will i do next? thanks.

Yes you can do that.

What do you see from your end? what is the problem? If the pfSense sits between the VoIP server and the VoIP client, you might need to set a rule to allow the connection between them.

@stephenw10: This post maybe relevant: http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,35414.0.html It looks as though it isn't configurable.  :( Though that is an old post. Steve The post is old but the content is actual. Probably no changes in 2.1

Good.  I had to allow a small piece of the 172 block through so I ginned up a modified block-RFC1918 rule.  I guess I needn't have bothered but I feel better about it anyway.  Thanks.

ok that sounds something like i can worth with however my 1st option was a mikrotik router and i am sooo struggling with it. it doesnt like having multiple gateways or rather i am not figuring out how to do it. about having pfsense. it would be a bit tough cause i'd have to dedicate a full x86 machine to put at the location for this task. and since pfsense cant be ported to mikrotik hardware …

@Siteview: Configured the interfaces LAN and WLAN; added a bridge and interface. I noticed the bridge having two interfaces in 'learning' state; I've never seen it switch to the forward state. I also tried forcing the interfaces to be edge ports, so they can enter “forwarding” state immediately — even if STP is somehow activated on that bridge. This didn't worked, as well as implicitly turning STP on and off. But if you look into the logs (not so long after updating interface / bridge configuration), you will probably see a line like this:``` kernel: bridge0: error setting interface capabilities on {one_of_bridged_interfaces}

That shows the config is indeed applied, it's configured that way, but the NIC refuses to use it for some reason. Not the first time I've seen that on a Realtek NIC, it's not very common, but some of those NICs cannot have their speed and duplex forced. The config setting applies, and the NIC refuses to use it. That's what you're seeing there. Is what you're plugged into really forced to 100 full? Best to always use autonegotiation if that's an option.

Thank you, yes I do have 2 nameservers defined for each WAN connection in System - General.  So 4 DNS servers total.  It should work when WAN1 is down but I am not at the location to test by yanking a cable etc.  Is there a way to temporarily "down" an interface via SSH or GUI to test this?

Thank you It worked

You're welcome.  :) If you're still worried about heat then mbmon will probably work on that age of box. There are quite a few references on the forum. Steve

Thanks, the screenshots look good. The earlier replies suggested you were mapping pfSense WAN directly to the NIC (not a pppoe interface) and you didn't say you changed that.