Both Windows and FreeBSD clients were missing the usual V6 DNS server addresses. With Comcast the V6 delegated prefix changes with every pfSense reboot. I'm requesting a 60 bit prefix. The delegated ranges below are correct given that the masked (xxxx) parts are the same value for both interfaces. LAN (lan)      -> re2        -> v4: 192.168.1.1/24                                   v6/t6: 2601:cf:xxxx:19b0:230:18ff:fec8:fdb/64 DMZ (opt1)      -> re3        -> v4: 192.168.2.1/24                                   v6/t6: 2601:cf:xxxx:19b1:230:18ff:fec8:fdc/64 I think I have found the problem, and a partial solution. On the Resolver (unbound) config page, there is a drop-down that allows you to specify network interfaces. Out of paranoia I've always selected only the LAN and DMZ interfaces there, leaving out the WAN interface. I'm guessing that most leave this setting at the default ALL setting. On a whim, since I was having V6 DNS resolution issues, I replaced the setting with ALL. Lo and behold all started operating as expected!!! Reverted to the more selective setting, with the following /var/unbound/unbound.conf generated. Interface IP(s) to bind to interface: 73.184.240.250  <<=== What is this doing here. It is the WAN side V4 address which is NOT selected! interface: 2001:558:6011:93:3ce8:f1d4:efe4:5540 <<=== Same here for V6! interface: 192.168.1.1 interface: 2601:cf:8101:b550:230:18ff:fec8:fdb interface: 192.168.2.1  interface: 2601:cf:8101:b551:230:18ff:fec8:fdc interface: fe80::230:18ff:fecb:11a3%re1 interface: fe80::1:1%re2 interface: fe80::1:1%re3 interface: 127.0.0.1 interface: ::1 Unbound restarted, I ran the V6 tests, again all is well!!! Rebooted… No more V6 DNS resolution!!! Over to the service status page. The unbound DNS resolver is stopped! Manually start the resolver and V6 DNS support is restored. So the question is: Why does unbound fail at reboot if specific interfaces are configured for unbound. No error logs in the unbound logs. This in the system log: rc.bootup: The command '/usr/local/sbin/unbound -c /var/unbound/unbound.conf' returned exit code '1', the output was '[1468603936] unbound[35432:0] error: can't bind socket: Can't assign requested address for fe80::230:18ff:fec8:fdb [1468603936] unbound[35432:0] fatal error: could not open ports' OK, deleted the V6 link local interfaces from the selected unbound interfaces, rebooted, and all is well. Sooo… Should link local interfaces actually be considered as V6 DNS query interface candidates or not. If so, why do they cause unbound to fail on reboot. If not, should they be presented as interface candidates in the unbound interface selection drop down?

Thank you Chris, tomorrow i install latest 2.3.2 build with fix.  :) EDIT: test with 2.3.2 snapshot 20160715.0559. Works. :)

Just a bump to express my dissapointment from an unsatisfied customer… During an internet outtage the other day I took the opportunity to do an upgrade on our pfsense box, only to discover a day or so later I was no longer receiving my emailed daily reports which contain traffic graphs for all my network segments.  Various searching led me to here. This is really a bummer.  This was one of the main reasons I moved to pfsense from another firewall appliance.  I do recognize this functionality was never built in to pfsense to begin with, and was only available by the use of a 3rd party "plug-in" essentially.  However, daily emailed reports with information graphs is pretty much standard fare these days, even on some lowly consumer routers. Please consider adding this feature in future releases. Thank you. -Alan

Mine work without a hitch!  :-)

There is generally no need to do incremental upgrades. Actually you are even better off not doing any incremental upgrades. A few little issues in the upgrade code have been fixed over time, so the very latest upgrade code is the best. If you move to 64-bit, then just restore your 2.1.5 config, it will reboot and apply all the upgrade steps right up to 2.3.* 2.3.2 will be out very soon, so you might even wait until then, just to save you upgrading again soon after you get to 2.3.1_5

@oletuv: Is the code in /boot/loader.conf.local loaded in addition to or instead of /boot/loader.conf? In addition.

Updating from console fails as well!!! [image: putty.png] [image: putty.png_thumb]

Yes, realize it should be able to boot from USB too.  Unclear why OP wants to go through the additional efforts though.  Unless there is something limiting their ability to point VM at ISO. Update: Oh wait, think I get it now.  The light just turned on. They are just trying it on the VM, but the final target is a physical machine.  duh.

You're missing files that are a key core part of the system. Seems likely your CF is flaky.

I can confirm this happens without any packages in the restore config file. I also noticed another bug, when Restoring a config file with interface mis-match, it asks you to set the interfaces when you restore the config. This is normal, the system will reboot and it asks again, Do you want to setup Vlans? ect. This is a huge issue doing anything remotely as now you basically lost access until you get back to the console.

Andrew, You were quite right. Perseverance paid off and having upgraded to the newest revision, the GUI is actually better too! Appreciate your advice. Can I ask further advice regarding the best method to allow my client PCs to reach Microsoft links to get their updates and my AV of course! I sis see some references to the use of regular expressions in the White list of the Squid Proxy and have no trouble using REs once I know Im in the right area!. Once again, appreciate the pointer. S

At that point the kernel is still initializing hardware, so if there is an issue it's between that hardware and FreeBSD. Searching around for a bit, this pops up: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189264 I'd move on to a different board, perhaps one that isn't almost 10 years old. :-)

Chris you are one of the founding members, please don't leave your kid aka pfSense alone.Best wishes for you!!!

I have managed to get the update from 2.3.1 to 2.3.1p5 working, but like you say, it takes a long time to complete. And i have used the 2Gb image, i think is gonna take a while longer for the 4Gb image. I have also the feeling that 2.3.1p5 is still verry unstable, i have opened another topic about problems with timeout errors at boot, and corrupting after reboot or shutdown. Grtz DeLorean

New traffic graphs are coming in 2.4 most likely. preview: https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=113513.msg636707#msg636707