@ezyclie: How come you can get 2.0.2-RC1? What is your "Firmware Auto Update URL"? The dashboard flashed me that an update is available, but to download this you need to go in system -> firmware -> updater setings. And there check the "allow auto-update [….]".

If I recall correctly, I had trouble with running pfSense in a VirtualBox VM when VirtualBox provided emulated AMD (pcn?) NICs to pfSense. The problem went away when I changed (in VirtualBox) the NIC emulation to Intel E1000 (82554 chipset?) - pfSense devices em0 and em1. It is not clear what you have bridged with what. (It takes some care to get it right.) I presume the Windows VM is bridged with the pfSense LAN NIC and the pfSense WAN NIC is bridged with a NIC connecting to a modem connecting to the Internet.

Glad to see this saga is solved.  ;D  I marked it as such.

What a extrem solution! RFC 1483 doesn't need authentication ;) I have the connection now working properly. I have configured the Linksys as a single user with my static IP through RFC 1483 Routed. It should be the same configuration for any router. Linksys configuration: Configure the LAN Ip interface with your ISP gateway IP and the mask (both provided by your ISP) Disable NAT. pfSense configuration: Configure your WAN IP interface with your ISP public IP and the mask. Add a gateway with the IP of the Linksys LAN interface. And enjoy, in my case after that, I had to reset the device to establish the connection.

Ok, so I was able to work when I chose the "Member Down" option and then unplugging the ethernet wire.  I just assumed that when I chose "Packet loss & High Latency" option that it would still work with the ethernet unplugged because technically an unplugged ethernet wire is 100% packet loss.  Ah well, it's working now so that's solved. BUT, the only thing that does not work with failover is, dun dun dun, the Server!  It works fine with the Tier 1 internet, but fails with the Tier 2 internet.  I dunno why.  I went to Firewall: Rules and changed the default gateway to the Failover one.  So any other ideas? Update: Ha, solved that.  All I had to do was add another NAT rule (DUHHH!) since it's on the OPT1 interface.  Wow, happy day today.  Just hope everything stays working fingers crossed…for a few seconds cause I need to eat  ;D  :D So this can be marked as solved, yay!

This is probably due to an error in the acpi table in the bios, it is indicating a sensor at an incorrect location hence the bad value. You should first check to see if a newer bios is available. Alternatively it may be possible to disable parts of acpi by adding: debug.acpi.disabled="thermal" ```to /boot/loader.conf.local Though I've never tried this myself. Steve

podilarius, it's a binary update here's the details (this is an install yesterday after switching the update URL to get 2.0.2-RC): 2.0.2-RC1 (i386) built on Wed May 16 17:53:37 EDT 2012 FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE-p9 Update available. Click Here to view update. and, after running the auto updater this morning: 2.0.2-RC1 (i386) built on Thu May 17 23:24:26 EDT 2012 FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE-p9 You are on the latest version.

You could follow this thread: http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,48780.0.html That involves such a device. Steve

Locking due to continued thread hijacking.

Try posting here as this is the English side http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/board,12.0.html

Thanks for the help.. i'll play around with that.

IBM machines are tricky to install Linux, I remember trying to install Linux mint and it refused and refused (I think is the BIOS) and given it up in the end and sold it on the good old ebay. Try this… Google search http://lmgtfy.com/?q=pfsense+ibm Burn another pfsense copy (AT A SLOW SPEED!) from http://www.pfsense.org/mirror.php?section=downloads Another hard drive (Not the original that come with it)   ::) Nics cards have died or static etc?  ??? Francis

@canefield: Dear all, Does somebody has any suggestions/ideas running or not running pfSense on a virtual environment? I know, it is best to use it as a seperate box indeed, but what happens while virtualized. Does pfSense support it? How about giving resources to it. How much CPU, RAM should I reserve for it? Because VMware is using a smarter way of resource managent I can only guess such things. Is there a formula? While installing a noticed pfSense had identified it as a virtual machine/platform. So I suppose it is working perfectly under VMware. The other reason I post this is because I think on some point something is lacking. For instance; I had a well-working environment with pfSense, Snort, Squid3 en Varnish. Suddenly, while no configurations where been applied or changed, services stoped abruptly without any trace. How reliable is pfSense in VMware vSphere? Something I really want to make crystal clear…a like pfSense and its features enormous Thanks in advance, Canefield We use pfsense under vshpere for multi-wan/captive portal purpose with 15 interfaces (VLANs). It works very well. 2 CPU and 1Go ram. It's a little bit too much (512 should be enough) but we have a lot of ram available.

We're big fans of jails, this server and all our others run in jails. Can't do the things a firewall needs to do when running within a jail though. They're great for server type uses, not possible for something like a firewall though.

I'd guess that you end up with the pfSense WAN interface and the LAN interface on the same subnet (192.168.1.0/24) which is an invalid configuration. If that is the case it might be easiest to change the pfSense LAN interface to (say) 192.168.8.1/24 and adjust the DHCP range accordingly.

It's not ie it's le (lower case L). You should only use e1000 type NICs in VMware though (which are em).

Thanks, I will take a look this weekend to figure out what is going on and post the results here.