https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=142267.0
https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=142598.0

In short: I beleive my issues are related to the APU2 BIOS. I've rolled back all but one unit to BIOS V4.0.7. So far, no issues with those routers for the last few days.

Not really.

This is called "router on a stick", and you will need to utilize VLANs and a switch capable of tagging (aka a smart / web / managed switch). Lots of examples online if you search for that term for what you want to do :)

Hello

I too am attempting to boot the iso using loopback, but am unsure of the grub parameters.

Has anyone had any success at this?

Thanks

/joe

Thank you OP, this was a nice learning experience.

Well worse case scenario, I only had to re-install from media, then restore the config xml file. as I've done in previous failed major version upgrade.

but is good to learn how to re-cover from a bad upgrade.

Almost every major version upgrade like this 2.3.4 to 2.4, or 2.x to 2.3, and all previous major number changes, seems to have problem upgrading properly.

"Is there a safe way to upgrade ntopng to 3.2? "

wait til they update the actual pfsense package…

Hi, thx for reply.

All disks are straight out of the box. All brand new ones. It's only the installation that fails in one point. Now I have used my "old" APU1 unit to install pfSense and then moved disk to new APU3 unit. Then disks works just fine. Thats why I wonder if there is an issue with installer or need to tune delays for SD/msata???

This may be related to offloading the hardware checksum.  I was seeing a lot of complaints about invalid checksums in packets sent to my VPN from Suricata, with a recommendation that hardware checksum offloading be disabled.

I did so, restarted the FW, and on restart did not get the new network notification.

Still curious about the CE vs Netgate release and about whether the checksum offload setting should, in the experience of the gurus, have somehow made the bridge address look new each time the system started?

Thanks for that list, should have started with the most obvious being that WAN wasn't getting an IP lease. Everything working much better now after fixing that.

After just waiting some time, the version number in the dashboard was updated.

But, "pfSense-upgrade -d" upgraded pfSense-kernel-pfSense_wrap_vga: 2.3.5 -> 2.3.5_1 [pfSense-core].

The system as rebooted. Now all versions are correct. "pfSense-upgrade -d" does not try to upgrade anything.

I cannot just believe, that the firewalls are now up to date…

Also - I noticed that I accidentally posted this in the wrong section - moderator - feel free to move to more appropriate section - like maybe the General Q&A section.

It seems to be a problem of the VirtualBox 5.2.

The same behavior I see for pfSense NanoBSD i386 2.3.2, 2.3.4 (2.3.3 was not tested).

Amd64 builds are working without problems.

.112 to .129?  You mean .127?  So they gave you a /28 or .112/28

.128 would be the next /28 with .112 the wire and .127 the broadcast in a .112/28 network..

If your having problems setting static - make sure you got the mask correct.. So your setting pfsense IP to .114 with /28 and gateway to the .113 address… .112 is the wire/network in that /28 that makes sense for the IPs for the IP range you were given... Unless they are giving you IPs out of a bigger mask the .129 makes no sense.  Validate what mask you are suppose to be setting with your isp.

your setting a /24 and setting the wan IP to the network address if they gave you a /28 which would make more sense if your saying the .113 is the gateway which would be the 1st IP in the /28.

Why would ISP set their IP .113 but allow you to use .112?  If they were just giving you a range of IPs out of bigger network you would think they would take the first address in the range as the gateway... So if it was a /24 then their gateway would normally be .1 or .254 etc.. Why would their gateway be at .113 out of /24 and let you use .112 to .129?  Something not right there..

@jimp:

I have quite a few test boxes here that upgrade over IPv6 all the time. Perhaps your IPv6 connectivity is what's broken?

I wouldn't be surprised if there would be something fishy with my ISPs IPv6 implementation. The IPv6 Configuration Type for the WAN interface is dhcp6 and there's nothing special in the configuration itself… However the gateway monitoring reports latency issues with the wan_dhcp6 but that seems to be quite normal issue with the ipv6 and pfsense...

What are you trying to achieve exactly? Are the default values not working for you?

Hi Gertjan, thanks for your reply,

Here are 2 sites that are unreacheable:

https://www.theandroidsoul.com/how-to-backup-apps-and-data-without-root-using-helium-android-app/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/04/19/the-first-comprehensive-study-on-women-in-venture-capital/ https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/FoldingMode

At first I thought it had to do with https, but that's not the case, other https sites load fine.

MTU is default: BLANK
I'll try to look into DNS, as I have thought about that being the culprit at the root of the problem, I think that's also what lead me to adding Google's DNS servers.

Got a new modem from Charter and was able to restore everything.

Gonna guess some sort of DHCP issue with the old modem but I'm not smart enough to know for sure ::)

Thanks for your replies.

What do you think ipa.gworks.mobi should resolve too?  That does not resolve on the public internet..

Are you using forwarder?  Default pfsense is unbound if running current version of pfsense.. Are you trying to point ipa.gworks.mobi to some local IP vs host override?