Glad you got it working!  ;D

Just finished reading and testing dhcrelay…. it seems there is only one target possible. It would seem the tabs are for enabling on a per interface basis. The server field is a general field it seems. Sorry to have bothered you guys... should have read before I ask... Peter

I don't see the PPPoE server as an interface. PPPoE under Interfaces->Lan only appears to be for dialing and outgoing PPPoE connection and using that as an interface on the lan. I want to set the service name for pfSense's internal PPPoE server so that client discovery uses service name to find it and connect to it. Otherwise clients will randomly dial whichever PPPoE server on the LAN responds first.

@harry66: Something seems to be special with the Tenda device as it seems to perform extraordinarily good on pfsense. Lucky choice on my part! It seems sometimes its possible to get more than what you pay for. @harry66: In addition to these experiments I decided to attach another USB wifi nic to the pfsense box to be able to compare my experiences against another chipset: It is an Alfa AWUS036H. Although all of the device I refer to show good performance under other OSes the Alfa is an exceptional player. As well with pfsense it behaves in more or less the same way you describe it for your Tenda stick. What other OSes did you try? Linux? @harry66: What I can say directly by comparing scan results is, that the Alfa constantly shows WLANs in reach where the Edimax and the Linksys always only show a subset. On top this subset is always different with every scan run. You mean on pfSense? Or do you get the varying scan results on other OSes as well? @harry66: I have no idea how we could further investigate. Perhaps contact support for the other suppliers and ask them to account for the results. Maybe they have their own firmware that needs their own driver tweaks to get best results. Thanks for the informative followup.

I would check that, thank you!

It seems that my physical drive has failed.

@ptt: @luke240778: Ok all, i am seriously needing help here. Have you considered the Commercial Support ? https://portal.pfsense.org/ Have considered it yes. Was hoping that some one on the forum would have been able to assist first, but if i can't get anywhere i guess thats what i'll have to do.

Thank you, that worked perfectly. I enabled the DNS-Rebind check and enabled NAT Reflection. EDIT: I found this page explaining the problem in more detail and showing other solutions. http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Why_can%27t_I_access_forwarded_ports_on_my_WAN_IP_from_my_LAN/OPTx_networks%3F

When deciding which interface to use to send an IP packet, IP software will send the packet on the interface belong to the subnet of the destination (either the ultimate destination or a router which will forward the packet closer to its destination). If you have multiple interfaces belong to the same subnet then it is not well defined which interface will get used (if any). There is a Wikipedia article on IP routing which you may find informative.

It's all being kept carefully under wraps. The only clue we ever has was this tweet in which Scott says: @Scott: Later this summer we will change how large scale deployments of pfSense are managed Clearly that time period has passed so you'd have to ask Scott.  :-\ Steve

Just checked in a fix in the tree for upcoming 2.0.1

@st4rtx: hello all i cant find any good pakage for pfsense to use snort sam any body now how to use snortsam in pfsense ? Developers are working on that: http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,27388.0.html Check here as well: http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,34751.0.html

Consider them stable when you can build them into a wall… like a Novell ;)

Sounds to me like it's not so nice and stable as you say… Perhaps this behaviour is fixed in the current release?. Maybe you should test that in a lab?

Glad to "contribute" in some way with pfSense  :D

Ahh, well thank you gentleman. I have learned even more!