i have this problem as well, packetloss on all interfaces. The difference in this case is, that i didnt upgrade to 1.2, i have a clean installation. If this packetloss occurs, i cannot ping the pfsense box from the lan. It disapears by itself, if i reboot the box the packetloss is gone. I removed some installed packages like ntop, will see if this fixed the problem.

@BigHusky: Over the last year of trying to get pfsense (just base, without any additional modules) to perform properly it just became clearer overtime that in order for pfsense to be able to perform close to the proprietary appliances you have to throw in 'very' expensive hardware (expensive at the router level). We ran it on a 1.8GHz Athlon with 1 and 2 GB of RAM and tried various network cards. Everytime you mention here that you are getting very poor throughput going for example to another host on the same network as the WAN interface, etc. you will most likely be told you need to buy Intel Nics and all other Nics are pretty much 'crap'. It turns out that even smallest routers and up to Cisco equipment don't have such 'highend' nics and certainly not such 'highend' cpu's/ram and still outperform pfsense in the same setup by a wide margin. Unless you are willing to put in the money for all these items you might end up in better performance shape if you go with a PepLink or other multi-wan appliance. I have high hopes for 1.3 and will be testing it again when first releases appear. In the meanwhile we had to take it out of usage. Just some other thoughts. But when you are talking about Cisco, Adtran, Sonicwall or any other pre boxed unit, they design the product around a specific hardware (including nics) and test that hardware. I am sure that the engineers behind the pre built devices had to find the pefect match of performance and price that worked. With a product like PFSense, you have to deal with many different Motherboards, CPU, Memory. BIOS settings, and yes NIC's. So yes, it is a bit harder to get the "perfect system" but look at all the variables that are taken into play. If someone recommends to use Intel nic, it is because you are getting the collective experience of other users and their success and testing. I am sure no one is just saying get intel nics just so Intel can make more money. I have used Many pre built boxes and you can certainly run into bottle necks on them also. Look at it this way….. If i have a Server that needs another nic, do i want to use something that has a proven track record or install a $15 off the shelf nic in a clients server?

@cmb: This is already addressed for 1.3 though, with a complete rewrite of the traffic shaper that gets rid of this and several other limitations in 1.2. Oh, sweet.  I plan to load 1.3 as soon as the beta lands, so I'm going to forget about this now. :) Thank you.

I know of them, don't know much about them though. It's likely just a slightly rebranded version. The way we control (to some extent) companies other than ourselves and our partners from profiting off the project without giving back is restricting usage of the logo, it looks like they just slapped a different logo on there.  Not sure if they provide support or what. For support, we have commercial support available from the foremost experts on the project with BSD Perimeter and Centipede Networks. I strongly recommend against doing business related to pfSense with any company other than BSD Perimeter and Centipede Networks, the primary corporate sponsors, and those listed on our recommended vendors page on the website. http://www.pfsense.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=44&Itemid=50 These companies provide significant resources to make this project what it is. Anyone not listed on our website is trying to profit off the project without giving back.

Ahhh…didn't know that option was even there! I know that command from linux, but didn't know it'd work with PFsense/FreeBSD... I'll check it out and let ya know... Thanks.

I'm new to BSD. (we're trying out pfsense because I decided I want to learn how to use it).  How would I disable local login? Will disabling the menu disable to console as well? EDIT: Thanks for the help.  I'm going to leave the console as is.  It should be safe enough, it's still in a restricted area.

I checked the active network connections when the pfsense freeze. I found out that the csrss.exe open a lot of connection. Finally I deleted the file (c:\windows\config\csrss.exe). I'm certain that the csrss.exe is not the MS csrss.exe which is located in the system32 folder, but I didn't find any useful info. Virusscan couldn't find anything. (McAfee) Now I'm waiting what will happen…

I assume you want multiple subnets on the same physical layer. DO.NOT.DO.THAT (you WILL have major problems with that…) Using VLANs or more NIC's is the recommended way.

maximum in 83.59 maximum out -12.66 I guess the difference could be traffic to the pfsense box itself, though that number doesn't seem to match the graph??

"Refer to the appropriate FreeBSD manpage for the driver you're using to see which options are available (or run ifconfig -m)."

@Island: can it load balance between the two to give you higher speeds when doing multiple uploads/downloads, or does it provide fail-over functionality only if one of the connections goes down? However you configure it. (Both is possible) Take a look at the how-to's.

Awesome, thanks :)

If you need trafficshaping of the vpn traffic using ipsec is currently the way to go as I know that this will be working with the upcoming shaper changes. OpenVPN shaping is not supported atm, same like filtering inside openvpn tunnels.

looking at this another way then. Is it possiable to forward on web traffic from squid to the ISA without losing the source IP address? As we are a school i have to keep track of what children are accessing. Thanks

Thankyou very much! Works like a charm  ;D

My installation was bad, new install fixed this one right up! ;D