Not really understanding the questions, perhaps a language issue. If I was moving to two new boxes with different hardware, this is how I would go about it- Backup config on both old boxes. Shutdown old backup and remove from rack. Rack the new master and backup. Restore the config from the old master onto the new master, adjust interfaces, etc. Restore the config from the old backup onto the new backup, adjust… Verify the new units are now showing any errors. Shut down old master. Move connections to new master and backup. Cycle provider equipment. Test inbound and outbound connections. Get a beer.

Guessing your ALIX config probably had 38400 for the baud rate (or something other than 115200), check your ALIX config backup in a text editor for the baud rate and change your console to match that. It's probably at an interface mismatch prompt on the serial console at a different baud.

Great, thanks for confirming that.  :) Steve

Hello Thx, CTRL-F5 solved the problem ;) Przemko

Well, I have completely started from the scratch. As the problem occurred while installing the upgrade to 2.2.4, I assumed that this was the source. But I proofed myself wrong by installing pfSense 2.2.2 with my configuration file, and it did not work either. So, the source of the problem was somewhere else, and finally the fresh installation seemed to be easier than to screw up even more the existing configuration. Solved for me.

@phil.davis: You put firewall rule(s) on LAN that match traffic from LAN clients and then choose the wanted gateway group down in the advanced section of the rule(s). yes, that is how i did it. went to firewall rules, click on LAN select IPv4 *  then edit it and in advanced features i click the advanced button on gatewary and select my multi wan group. but it slower instead of faster. each wan has an 10mbps adsl but when i put it together it gives me 6mbps on my speedtest this is the topic whit this issue https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=97217.0

well its a fresh upgrade from 2.2.3 to 2.2.4 and btw on 2.2.3 never had the issue

Well, thank you for your help doktornotor and robi. I'll try to apply your solutions again. Robi, my boss wanted to install pfsense on a HDD (we already have 2 appliances with pfsense installed on a HDD and these appliances run). But these appliances are different than the new device. That's why I don't use a CF card for the moment. If it's the only way to configure it correctly, I'll try it. Thanks again

Thanks!  Before we go back, we'll tripple check the changes made for the tunning parameters.  But litterally the only thing that changed was the update from 2.2.3 to 2.2.4.  All the servers are directly connected to the firewall - there are no switches, no OS or driver changes were made to the servers on either side.  It's very odd.  And I did confirm that all test results were with a 1500 byte MTU.  There is no traffic going through this firewall that could vary - it is simply a test platform with connections to two servers out two Chelsio NIC's, so there is no way the "base" level of traffic varried between the tests. AS soon as we double check and can test I'll post again.

I just was saying that I wasn't on ram or nano That I have disk space My 2 pfsenses are not in those cases

@pete: I couldn't wait so updated again.  Update worked fine and all is well again. 2.2.4-RELEASE (amd64) built on Sat Jul 25 19:57:37 CDT 2015 FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE-p15 Good to hear that… ;)

I made a dumb typo url_port should be url_ports https://github.com/pfsense/pfsense/pull/1794

@nfw I recently bought new hardware (64bit) and when attempted to install pfsense on it i had EXACTLY the same issues you did (bootloop). I tried to troubleshoot it the same way you did but no luck. NanoBSD on a CF card would boot fine but had other issues like not being able to run snort or suricata  and…! Frustrated and a little sad for my misfortune i decided to use it as an extra GNU/Linux-desktop for experimenting. It served well that purpose until this noon when i decided to give the 2.2.4 a go! BINGO!!! installed just fine and is now my new pfs-box! I did Uncheck the 'packet mode' box during bootblock installation but i don't know if that was necessary. I didn't bother reinstalling just to check it. SATA SSD 60gb full partition from Muskin. I am planning to make a new thread about the hardware i used. Very... VERY... Happy with the result Regards!

Dude. You have a corrupt filesystem with missing/screwed /etc/group. Stop "fixing" permissions, do a clean 2.2.4 install and restore config.

Just means you don't have any IPsec config when it's doing the config upgrade. I added a check to skip that part where you don't have IPsec configured, to prevent the noise in that case in future releases. Doesn't hurt anything.

There's a good chance the HAVP package could have filled /tmp there. That's normally only applied in embedded (Nano) installs where running HAVP is not recomended. Increase the size of /tmp if that's the case. Steve

It's your code "hardcoding" it when you select something from dropdown. How's that user-induced?! Users assume the GUI exists for a reason, and have a need to check the settings! Stupidity illustrated: Step 0: [image: gJwcXKB.png] $ grep firmwareurl /cf/conf/config.xml                                 <firmwareurl>https://updates.pfsense.org/_updaters/amd64</firmwareurl> Step 1: Uncheck, Save, as advised above: [image: tqVIDuR.png] $ grep firmwareurl /cf/conf/config.xml $ Good that we spared one line in config.xml! To make it more helpful, there's nothing useful visible in the GUI either. ::) Step 2: Select the (recommended) "Current architecture", watch the "Use an unofficial server for firmware upgrades" getting automagically ticked. Click Save. [image: 5TtKj3o.png] $ grep firmwareurl /cf/conf/config.xml                                 <firmwareurl>https://updates.pfsense.org/_updaters/amd64</firmwareurl> Result: We are back to Step 0. Wash, rinse, repeat.  >:( >:( >:( Bonus: I also see this note there: NOTE: When a custom URL is configured, the system will not verify the image has an official digital signature but cannot see that coded anywhere. Sigh. Tell people what they have set (even by default) in the GUI. Instead of leaving it blank – and leaving the config.xml blank as well.