Or simple solution on windows is just add this reg key and it should all be gone. elevated prompt reg add hklm\system\currentcontrolset\services\tcpip6\parameters /v DisabledComponents /t REG_DWORD /d 255 reboot Top put it back how you found it reg delete hklm\system\currentcontrolset\services\tcpip6\parameters\ /v DisabledComponents /f reboot When you get ready to use ipv6, the netsh commands jorgeO posted allow you to turn off the 3 different transition methods ms thought in their infinite wisdom it was a good idea to turn all 3 at the same time… JFC they think their user base is just complete morons.. the reg key above will turn it all off and even the teredo and isatap and 6to4 interfaces will be gone.

Have they explicitly stated "All Ports"? Perhaps they're blocking the common players (25,80,443,1194,8080,8081)? Might be worth a try setting up an OpenVPN server on something off the beaten track like 8894 for eg. If they're really blocking everything then I agree w/johnpoz. That's not a real internet conx, time to find one….

@jahonix: In the past there was something with LAGG and VLANs, right? Or did I mix that up as well? Not with bridging that I can think of offhand. Some of the more esoteric combinations like that have no doubt had an issue at some point in the past 12 years. I'm not aware of any in 2.2.x or 2.3.x though.

This is becoming a critical issue for us, can anyone tell what I've got wrong?

I keep getting conflicting info on whether or not pfSense 2.2.6 can handle DSL. There are many different options or point of views and pending on this also the informations about will differ even and even and for sure you could be really misunderstanding some things. Normally or usually pfSense is a x86 based firewall not more but also not less and it comes without a modem to connect to the Internet. So an internal or external modem will be needed to do so. But then, if an internal modem will be inserted, many peoples will be lead to say that pfSense is DSL capable! Draytek Vigor 130 / Zyxel 1312 / or some AllNet modems are at this time the state of the art if we are talking about ADSL/VDSL & Vectoring, so you should be looking over to find the right one that is matching the needs given to you by your ISP. And another one is coming pretty new on the market from DrayTek it is an internal PCIe modem/router card and it is capable to handle DSL too! It is called or named Draytek VigorNIC 132 and it is sold for ~135 € here in Germany in the near future. One site says no, another says yes. In normal you take x86 hardware and build a pfSense firewall with it, point! And then you will need a modem in front of that device called firewall to connect it to the Internet or a device similar to a modem; FTTH/FTTC a fiber coper converter or ONT/ONTU box A pure modem according to the standard your ISP if offering and need A router with an integrated modem that can be set into the so called "bridge mode" and act likes a pure modem A WLAN AP as a WISP CPE device that acts then as the "modem" or Internet connection Can anyone verify one way or the other? I'm doing a DIY router and must choose a OS soon. Try to start from the scratch, likes; What is your ISP offering you exactly? ADSL, ADSL2+, VDSL, VDSL2, VDSL & Vectoring, FTTH/FTTC/FTTN,….. What you need to connect to the Internet? What is the ISP in normal telling his customers or give them as a ISP router or modem? Will likely be using Sonic.net DSL. Thanks! They are offering so much Internet services, that you should perhaps be more clear about what service they are offering especially you! Please don´t get me wrong, I am not from Santa Rosa, CA and know only that they are offering a wide area of services to their clients, from FTTH/FTTC fiber Internet line, 2 wire over bonded DSL lines and other (A/V)DSL services across the whole Internet connection field and not all modems are matching all offered services! Sonic Wiki with a compatible modems Sonic Wiki modem reference Sonic Wiki device returning policy (30 days)

I finally got my system working again …. https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=114128.msg634619#msg634619 And it had nothing to do with memory so I'll never really know what caused this error.

I hope you guys are happy. I spent my entire $200 steam sale budget on used books.

@gaido: every time i restart my router my WAN IP Address will banish and i reinstall again my pfsense to return my WAN IP Address. can someone help me in my Problem? What hardware you are using? Is this a USB to LAN adapter you are talking about? Or is this a Supermicro board with a dedicated IPMI Port?

I need 3 separate VLAN's running, each with their own DHCP Scope 1 x Office Network (Wifi AP - Unifi AP LR) 1 x Guest Network (Wifi AP - Unifi AP LR) 1 x Labs Network (Switch L2) If this APs are offering multi-SSID support I would set up them as the following; VLAN1 - default VLAN for the admin all devices are inside VLAN10 - SSID "office" (internal) - 192.168.2.0/24 (255.255.255.0) Radius Server and client isolation is on VLAN20 - SSID "guests" (external) - 192.168.3.0/24 Captive portal with vouchers client isolation is on VLAN30 - SSID "testlab" (internal for doing tests only) - 192.168.4.0/24 Radius Server but another user group or free and open or what ever you wish to do And this might be set up on all three WiFi APs, if they are offering multi-SSID support. 1 x Labs Network (Switch L2) If this might be not being also WiFi based you could also set up. VLAN1 - default VLAN for the admin all devices are inside VLAN10 - SSID "office" (internal) - 192.168.2.0/24 (255.255.255.0) Radius Server and client isolation is on VLAN20 - SSID "guests" (external) - 192.168.3.0/24 Captive portal with vouchers client isolation is on VLAN30 - "testlab" (internal for doing tests only) - 192.168.4.0/24 LDAP or OpenLDAP Server or free and open or what ever you wish to do And this might be set up on all three WiFi APs, if they are offering multi-SSID support and the test lab is cable or wire based on. All this traffic runs through a Dell X1026 Managed switch. This is a managed Layer2+ switch and there fore I would let handle and route the pfSense box then the VLANs and manage the security options.

However, the upgraded node (when running as master), shows a clear network performance degradation: While node-1 (the one still running v2.2.3) can easily forward traffic at +250Mb/s, the alternate node (the one running v2.3) tops at +-80Mb/s. Well, how to say it and being friendly any more? If I buy a MS Windows Server 2008 together with hardware and now I want to install MS Server 2012 R2 on it, I will find perhaps out that this hardware is not really good matching the newer software version. But there in MS Windows based fields we know this and life with this. Why not also with FreeBSD and pfSense? As a customer and user of pfSense I can´t say I would be loving to see even newer things, such as Intel QuickAssist, AES-NI support and DPDK or netmap-fwd, but I am no really willing to buy new hardware or plain upgrading this hardware to the nearly latest or an actual stand. Not really nice said, but the true from my point of view on this. While diagnosing the issue we’ve found node running pfSense v2.3 to have a high load under such a ‘low’ traffic (ie. 80Mb/s), and high CPU usage by network drivers, as show below: Perhaps, only perhaps I mean, they are working on newer drivers or make older drivers better matching with the actual new hardware, but then often compared to older hardware it is then not really a gain and playing well together. Perhaps you could think about a newer board, stronger CPU or SoC and/or more or faster RAM? I really don´t know it and I am not a professional likes cmb and others, but often new hardware does the trick for many years, let us say the next 5 or 6 years. Any suggestion? I will be truly to you, I would stay with the 64Bit version 2.2.6, but even this is related to all circumstances and seen affects in each pfSense system. Some are really hard likes your 250Mbs/80Mbs, but also other strange points would let me say wait since pfSense let us say 2.4 or higher. And if this would be not really better going then for you and your company I would really urgent think about a hardware upgrade.

I don't know why but after clicking around some more the hybrid outbound nat automatically created the correct rules. Now there is a source 10.0.8.0/24 destination lan address entry and I'm able to access my lan :) Going to set up a fresh VM tonight on my htpc if I got time. Thanks.

"Interesting, is there no way to move this around between ports?" Huh??  Yes there is.. Just assign your interface to the mac you want.  You can do it via the console cli or even in the gui.. But if your doing it from the web gui your prob going to knock your self off.. You need to know the mac of what port you want to assign the interface too.  As you can see with mine the mac are made up since my pfsense virtual.  I did that on purpose so I know exactly which interface is which in my vm setup. But its the same thing for a multiple port nic, each port on the nic will have its own mac, they normally increment by 1.. As to which port is which.. Normally going to go from 1 side or the other so like eth0 might be the top as you look at it or might be the bottom, but the port next to it should be eth1 and then eth2, etc.. [image: assignports_.jpg_thumb] [image: assignports_.jpg]

Root cause of that is this: https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/6499 if you're in a situation where you're hitting that routinely, the latest 2.3.2 snapshots are stable and include the fix to properly expire those states. System>Update, Update Settings, switch to Development and click Save. Then back to the System Update tab and upgrade there. Upping the max fragment entries will prolong how long it takes to reach the maximum and may suffice for some people.

Can't go wrong with that.

Thanks everyone. I have successfully blocked the device using a MAC address filter on my wireless APs so that the phone can't even even to the wifi network. This keeps the network stable when the employee comes in the the office and forgets to turn off the wifi or tor orbot app on his phone. The only other options I can think of are to A.) change the IP configuration on the Orbot app or B.) Change my pfSense IP. I will continue looking on Android and Tor forums for more info.