This: https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Why_can%27t_I_access_forwarded_ports_on_my_WAN_IP_from_my_LAN/OPTx_networks Steve

Yeah, I guess.  I understand your approach. Clearly the hardware should be able to detect, and report that it's only working within a 1G infrastructure. However in this case I'm stuck with what hardware i've got.  I guess if it comes to it, I'll have to change the software..  Either hack a workaround into pfSense or more likely do something manually with a base operating system. Even if I was flexible on hardware, I might still have good reasons to want to run the interface at a particular speed/duplex, depending on my requirement at the time.  Auto detect is not always the right answer. …  So I still think this as should be seen as a fault  -  If pfSense is prepared to offer speed/media opt on a base network interface, then it should be smart enough to realise.. that when it is dealing with a lagg virtual if, then it should drill down to the underlying media and offer a speed/duplex combination that is common to all interfaces I'm thinking for this purpose the cable medium doesn't need to be relevant -  for example, baseT, and baseSX ; these could go together as member interfaces, so long as both are set to the same duplex and speed rating. XW

I was actually about to respond to phil.davis saying that I noticed on my patch screen it has the github URL for the patch file, like: http://github.com/pfsense/pfsense/commit/e69a0cf3a216c8647a6def4eee41ab01319ce90f.patch So if I take off the .patch, that brings me to the page that shows me which branch it's on. It's still trial and error through to see if I got the right one. I also tried browsing the repo and finding one of the files that was patched and seeing which ID it should be, but that's more difficult IMO than the method above. It would just be easier to have the branch identified on the revision but I don't do this often so as long as I have a way to verify I'm getting the right patch that helps me out a lot.

Sorry I made a typo My Lan 1 interface is 192.168.0.0/24 My Lan 2 interface is 192.168.3.0/24 The 192.168.1.0/24 range is in use on a VPN that is not related to this Unless you think it makes a difference? Thanks for the response I'm still having trouble getting this to work

I also got this "user unbound does not exist" on a 6 March snapshot as reported here: https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=89925.0 I will try a later snapshot tomorrow. But this was a new snapshot build after those that had the small size.

Bad cable? Bad port(NIC or switch)? Have you tried re-plugging the network cable instead of a reboot? Have you tried swapping ports on your firewall?

Yep , figured it out first off, here's my admin interface, not that it really matters. Packets: sent=67113, rcvd=67113, error=0, lost=0 (0.0% loss) in 33556.000901 sec RTTs in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.119 / 0.389 / 15.909 / 0.320 Bandwidth in kbytes/sec: sent=0.120, rcvd=0.120 In order to shape download traffic correctly, I had to traffic shape LAN egress. While I allow link local traffic to PFSense on LAN, it doesn't have much bandwidth set. Pings that did not make it out my WAN kept getting set to qLink instead of qICMP because of my catch all LAN to LAN. Traffic that actually creates a state on the WAN interface properly gets the desired queue.

I'm not familiar with the Negtear switch or the Asus AP, but I think it sounds a little odd that your AP is picking up it's IP via DHCP. In most cases you should set the IP on an access point statically, at least in my experience. Have a go at assigning a permanent IP to the Asus AP and see if that has any effect.

No need to wait for that. A simple power cycle will cause it to create a new static map process. I run in to this same issue because my freebie Meraki switch doesn't allow disabling of CDP and LLDP. Lets just say it's nightmare to get it to static map to the correct MAC.

https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=89419.msg494797

i think whoever gave you that sheet with the current "linux' firewall rules, probably has no clue how a firewall should work, and made an overcomplicated mess of things. do note that i personally know (almost) nothing about firewalling :)

@johnpoz: if its physical hardware it would use that mac on that interface, unless you went in and changed it or did some sort of clone in pfsense.  If its running on virtual then it could create new virtual mac if you did something in the setup, etc. Yes, it is physical hardware, so that is good. @johnpoz: So see a 2 second sniff on the wan in pfsense would of told you that traffic wasn't get there, and looking to validate your wan was the IP you thought it was suppose to be is another valid check ;) Knowing it isn't there and being actually able to see it are two different things.  There is a lot of information and I'm brand new to pfsense, so actually finding it, was difficult.  New tools are the hardest to use. @johnpoz: Glad you got it sorted.  It tried firing up that software this morning and couldn't figure out how to get the debugger tester you showed running. Yea, welcome to the hardest to setup software in the world!  It is better now than a few years ago, but I've setup at least 100 accounts in PHPed and I still use a cheat sheet.  Once you get the account setup, then there is also a component that must be installed into PHP on the web server and php.ini needs to be updated with the ports and IP of the users.  Its rather a pain to setup.  Once setup, it is amazing.  I can't live without it.  The ability to step line by line through a PHP program is very helpful when there is a strange bug.  Plus the code prefill and highlighting are very helpful.  For example, if you create a variable called $rec_num, next time you type $rec it prefills $rec_num.  That really cuts down on typos.

I was thinking of something similar myself where an external modem like this one connects to the 4G either : http://www.maplin.co.uk/p/tp-link-3g4g-single-band-n150-portable-wireless-n-router-n40ql or http://shop.ee.co.uk/dongles/pay-monthly-mobile-broadband/osprey-black-from-ee/details The question is how I can get the roadwarrior clients that use the primary link to connect. The ip address of the 4G is most likely dynamic so hence the question if anyone has done something similar. Cheers, Raj

It seems that I have a similar problem at one of the sites where I have dual wan ( PPoE and wan 1 and static ip on wan 2). Backup link is over 3G router , slow, but working. I have received a  notification by email " WAN01_PPPOE is down, removing from routing group dualnet. Pfsense 2.1.5 32 bit installed on a 2GB kingston usb memory, embeded version with vga ( intel atom D2500cc). I can't login remote as the second wan doesn't have a public IP :(. I will check the logs tomorrow. BR, Adrian

depends on what you're doing with it. In many cases, yes. In some cases, no firewall will do exactly what IOS can do for more complicated routing-specific needs. Or if you have interfaces in it other than Ethernet (T1 CSU/DSU, among other line cards).