Not sure what PCIe devices might allow that. I've only ever used PPP with those. Why do you want to bridge this though? If you only have one public IP I'm not sure why you would. You could use that IP on the bridge interface and be able to access pfSense that way but then there seem little point in bridging. If you use the public IP on some downstream device you wouldn't be able to access pfSense without going through that device somehow. There is also the fact that most "modems" will want to use the IP themselves and run in router mode. Steve

Thank you so much for your insight you were correct, once I added the -S option for source address it worked :-) ping -S x.x.y.y x.x.z.z

Thank you.

Thank you! I have just updated the driver with the one you mentioned and I did some iperf tests and it looks like it's stable. Cheers!

It should work like that as long as the settings have been applied correctly and there are no conflicting subnets. However you will be (at least) double NATing which just makes things hard if you ever have to configure port forwards etc. If you connect the pfSense console does that have a real WAN IP? Can you ping out from there? You might have to spoof the MAC address on the WAN if your ISP requires that. Steve

Yes, that's nothing to worry about. Just your internal clients ACKing a reset after the state has been closed by the firewall. Steve

wow wow wow There goes my weekend....... Merci Muchos Guys

@grimson I don't want to do anything off regarding your Germany knowledge, as indeed the real German word is die Lichter. Du hast voellich recht. But read this this internet folklore: http://www.blinkenlichten.info/origin.html

Great. Thanks for the follow up. Steve

If you're installing as a typical firewall/router, you'd enable DHCP on it, as well as DNS.

Yes, policy routing to a particular gateway should have no effect on the outbound NAT which should still translate that to the CARP VIP. If it does not then your failover will be a lot less smooth as states will need to re-created on the other node WAN. Steve

Steve Thank you for your reply. Please accept my apologies for my late response but I have been traveling. Responding to your question, in previous applications of older pfsense versions I thought I had seen host names for mac numbers assigned in a specific pool that were not assigned as static. In version 2.4.4 I did not see this. That is the root of my question. Clearly your response makes the most sense. In any case host names can be assigned via a static ip assignment. Robert

Ah, cool. That's exactly what I saw. I got as far as opening a bug before I realised. Steve

Ha, wish I had the memory of an elephant Thanks.

Thanks! That worked.

Dude go into the resolver and put in your fqdn and IP you want it to resolve to locally... [image: 1541673395512-hostoverride-resized.png]

Can we see more of that log? It shows the mpd daemon restarting there, does it restart on each cycle? That would be unexpected. It should just try to reconnect with the existing process until it succeeds. Steve

It's almost certainly the new gateway logic. There are a number of (now fixed) bug reports relating to that. Settings it to the PPPoE gateway specifically should resolve but if not you might try a 2.4.5 snapshot that has those fixes in. Steve

If it's on a VM the drive is just a file anyway. You can just copy it off the host. Or snapshot the VM. Steve