Ok, many thanks, it works now!
I don't know why, but as soon as I set up the static route again, it worked. Even the Zyxel does NAT, the route was obviously necessary!

@verbal:

As I mentioned above, does that mean that if I have LAN2 and LAN3 as different subnets, do I have to create separate block/pass rules that match for them?

If you have many internal subnets and you want to block access to any of them from the DMZ you have a few choices.
As I said by default everything is blocked. If you add a new interface but don't put any firewall rules on it the only that will be allowed is DHCP (assuming you have set a dhcp server on it). The only exception to this is the LAN interface which has some rules added by default as you can see.

You could add BLOCK rules that have destination LAN* subnet at the top of the list. Traffic coming into the interface will be matched against one of these if is for a local LAN. Once it has matched it will be blocked, no further action is taken on that packet. Then add a rule below the block rules to allow out any traffic you wish to allow.

I have 11 subnets on my home box and adding 10 block rules on an interface is time consuming and makes the firewall rules table harder to read. Instead I have created an ALIAS that contains all my local subnets in a list, I called it LOCAL.
Then I have a single firewall rule that is ALLOW traffic with destination 'not LOCAL'. Much easier to read but doing just that does not allow traffic to the local DNS forwarder, even on the same interface. So I have an additional rule ALLOW traffic with destination LAN(whichever interface this is) subnet on port 53.
I use this on a guest wifi interface. Doing this does not block traffic to the pfSense webgui listening on the WAN so you must add a block rule or add it to the ALIAS if you don't want this.

Steve

wifi2rules.jpg
wifi2rules.jpg_thumb

Every release's release notes contain the changes since the last stable release, that's the differences between 2.0.1 and 2.0.2. It does technically "upgrade" the OS because of some security fixes to components within FreeBSD, but it's strictly those security fixes, it's not a completely different version. Still 8.1.

If the "192.168.2.x router" does do NAT the static route won't be necessary but won't do any harm.

If the "192.168.2.x router" doesn't do NAT the static route will be necessary (but may not be sufficient).  Just add the static route.

If I'm not mistaken the "!" means it's connected and can't get to the internet. That's what will happen if you have "host-only" as your connection.

Yes, all the settings are stored in config.xml - so yyou need to get the dhcpd section of that and add your static mappings in the same format as an existing one. For example, here is a tpyical DHCPD section of config.xml:

<dhcpd><lan><range><from>10.99.0.200</from> <to>10.99.0.239</to></range> <defaultleasetime><maxleasetime><netmask><failover_peerip><gateway><domain><domainsearchlist><ddnsdomain><tftp><ldap><nextserver><filename><rootpath><dhcpleaseinlocaltime><numberoptions><enable><staticmap><mac>00:9c:02:07:89:1e</mac> <ipaddr>10.99.0.25</ipaddr> <hostname>PRINTER-01</hostname> <filename><rootpath></rootpath></filename></staticmap> <staticmap><mac>00:1d:e0:03:46:21</mac> <ipaddr>10.99.0.81</ipaddr> <hostname>ADMIN-PC-01</hostname> <filename><rootpath></rootpath></filename></staticmap> <mac_allow><mac_deny></mac_deny></mac_allow></enable></numberoptions></dhcpleaseinlocaltime></rootpath></filename></nextserver></ldap></tftp></ddnsdomain></domainsearchlist></domain></gateway></failover_peerip></netmask></maxleasetime></defaultleasetime></lan> <opt1><range><from>10.99.1.192</from> <to>10.99.1.223</to></range> <defaultleasetime><maxleasetime><netmask><failover_peerip><gateway><domain>extralan.mydomain</domain> <domainsearchlist><enable><ddnsdomain><tftp><ldap><nextserver><filename><rootpath><dhcpleaseinlocaltime><numberoptions><staticmap><mac>00:1d:09:56:78:13</mac> <ipaddr>10.99.1.50</ipaddr> <hostname>HR-PC-01</hostname> <filename><rootpath></rootpath></filename></staticmap> <mac_allow><mac_deny></mac_deny></mac_allow></numberoptions></dhcpleaseinlocaltime></rootpath></filename></nextserver></ldap></tftp></ddnsdomain></enable></domainsearchlist></gateway></failover_peerip></netmask></maxleasetime></defaultleasetime></opt1></dhcpd>

Hey,
I could fix it! The first problem was that I bought a straight through cable and not a Nullmodem cable. As soon as I got access the ALIX I could fix it. So, I am back to square one and have to configure everything new. That might call for many many new posts.
Thanks and see you next time! ;)
F N

Right, if you don't have a switch that supports VLAN tagging (and know how to set that up), there's not much we can do to help.  Either a switch that supports VLANs or another NIC is what you need.  But, do yourself a favor and do not get a USB NIC.

If you tell us more about what hardware you're running on we can help point you in the direction of inexpensive NICs or other solutions.

omg i've finally fixed it after trying thousands of different combinations. I really hate this cn, dn, ou, stuff.

Here is my final working configuration;

While it might be a problem with the CD on your hardware, it's not a general issue that happens to everyone. Many people that I talk to have used the LiveCD without issue.

Have you tried a 2.1 livecd? http://snapshots.pfsense.org/

What NICs are you using that are supported by the rl(4) driver? I didn't think it supported any pci-e NICs.  :-\

If 300ms is within your 'normal' range of latency you might have to tune the apinger parameters. Is think 200ms is the default setting for latency warnings.

Steve

@wallabybob:

Try a pfSense 2.1 snapshot build. It includes much more up to date device drivers than any of the pfSense 2.0.x builds.

That did it!! Thanks!! I hope I dont miss any of the features of the stable release. This beta is going to a production environment…thanks again!

Hi,

Just to report an upgrade problem : 2.0.1 + siproxy -> 2.0.2
I have lost the DNS, as described in the release notes (PPPOE problem).
But I have broken all the packaging system too. Siproxy was broken in the interface & not running.

Revert to previous 2.0.1 & waiting for stable 2.0.3, as I don't have issues for my needs.

If you are interested in, I have keep the update log file & the diff file from my previous user setup.

Thanks for the good job.

Phil

@trunix:

LinuxTracker - you may want to consider this nic if you have to purchase another pcmcia adapter in the future. I moved off realtek and onto this card based on the dc driver and it's been great.

Appreciate the reply.
Unfortunately the WAN adapter is giving me trouble right now and it's onboard.
The notebook only has one PCMCIA slot and for whatever reason I don't like USB NICs.

The location where this is has a newer notebook on hand; I'll just swap it out.
That should put an end to this saga - or at least to this thread.

@trunix:

NETGEAR FA511 10/100Mbps PCMCIA Ethernet Adapter

I was wondering what chipset was inside that card.
It took me a while but I finally found a partial list of Netgear Chipsets
http://tuto.netgear-forum.com/Documentation/Chipsets/

The pfSense webgui listens on all interfaces so you would be able to access it from a VLAN interface as long as you have firewall rules to allow it (which LAN does by default).
The difficulty would be accessing the webgui for the switch which is usually on the default vlan only. You need to make sure you don't lock yourself out of it which I can tell you from personal experience can be very frustrating!

Steve

Edit: That linked youtube video is informative. It would seem that the main reason for not using the default vlan is that it exposes the management interface to the general LAN network. I guess it depends how much of a concern that is to you.

No problem!  :)

Thankyou all. I will try using the 2.2 version, and see if that works.

I'm planning to put this device into production so i may need to revert back to a stable release, but my first goal is just to get it running.

Will keep you posted as to progress.

Hello

I think the DL380 Gen8 has a new controller built in (SmartArray 420i, not the 410i). There are several options you have with the DL380 if the built in controller does not work with pfsense:
1. install another PCIe controller that does work
2. Use USB and embedded set up (internal USB port)
3. use the SD card and embedded install

Just a reminder that teh SD card is not HOT PLUG. server should be turned off before you install the SD card, otherwise it will not detect it and will not boot from it. If you manage to install it on SD or USB memory then chances are you will not need those $450+ SAS HDDs :D