Answering my own post here… It seems that the synchronization of limiter rules are causing the problem in version 2.2. I haven't tested it yet but it sounds reasonable. The topic has also been discussed here: https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=87541.0 …and a bug report has been filed here: https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/4310

Please note i am using transparent proxy

It only occurred initially after installation.  After enabling it through the web gui it then showed up in the console correctly as an option to disable.  Didn't try it but believe it would probably work now. The web gui would give the standard message about creating keys and delaying ssh start up.  But never did get the success message until enable ssh in via the web gui. Think it was probably some part of the system seeing it as enable and another as disabled.  So out of sync. No not really concerned about it.

@lowprofile: Are you running raid? Software or hardware? RAID mirror : why ?

The root issue is what I added to the 2.2 upgrade guide here. Either enable active LACP on your switch, or disable strict mode as noted there. We'll change the default back to its previous setting for 2.2.1. https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/4308 Steve - thanks for saving me some time searching by finding that first. :)

Yeah having a broken manually-edited config will do that. :) Glad you found the issue, thanks for the follow up.

"give 3 cores and 12gb to pfsense and 1 core and 4gb to the cloud." You have that switched I think..  What is the speed of the connection??  How many vpn connections?  Pfsense sure and the hell does not need 3 cores and 12GG of ram ;)

From my limited experience with playing with custom options with 2.2 and the integrated unbound you have to add server: option option to get them to work, or unbound fails to start without that server: at first line.

Hmm, I believe the correct type is ufs2. However the fact that it seems to be reporting a filesystem that's bigger than the drive isn't good. Re-flashing and restoring the config was the way to go.  :) Steve

Thanks for testing that. I was pretty sure but it's nice to know for certain.  :) Steve

@robi: The easiest way would probably be to just implement a message box on the package manager tab, The problem is that the Package Manager does not know what files and/or config changes were made by the package… Those particulars are handled by each package specifically. Having the option to select "Complete De-install" or "Keep Settings" in the package manager is a great idea, but it would need some integration with the packages. So for example... Snort.xml has the following tags for Install/Deinstall <custom_php_install_command>include_once("/usr/local/pkg/snort/snort_post_install.php");                 ]]></custom_php_install_command>         <custom_php_deinstall_command>snort_deinstall();                 ]]></custom_php_deinstall_command> The file snort.inc has the functions for Install/De-install [ [color=blue]function snort_deinstall() ] If the keep setting is not enabled in the package it will remove the custom settings in the config and also remove the modified files/downloaded files. /* Keep this as a last step */         if ($config['installedpackages']['snortglobal']['forcekeepsettings'] != 'on') –-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So I think it would be best to introduce a new tag say "Custom _php_keep_deinstall" <custom_php_install_command></custom_php_install_command> <custom_php_deinstall_command></custom_php_deinstall_command> <custom_php_keep_deinstall_command></custom_php_keep_deinstall_command> Then each package could have a function that will handle "keep settings" on De-Install. Its also worth noting, that even on a Re-Install. The de-install function is called first.

The hard drive is the only SATA device in the system.  The DVD ROM is IDE (That's how old the thing is.  lol) So, to end my tale…  ;) I wiped the box and installed 2.1.5 64-bit from disk without incident.  I couldn't find a backup anywhere, so I had to reconfigure everything. All in all it will be a good thing.  I got the BIOS straightened out (the HD controller was in IDE compatibility mode; it is now in SATA mode), the OS is now 64-bit (the original was 32-bit), and I'm far more familiar with the system than I was 2 years ago when I built the original so the reconfig only took a couple of hours.  I still need to redo the Dansguardian, Squid, Squidguard, Snort, etc., but the major stuff is back online. Hopefully we can figure out what in 2.2 doesn't like what in my box so I can eventually upgrade it to get the latest goodies.  Or maybe I just need to use a more modern box...  ;) Thanx to all who helped out.  :)

Nice to see that I'm not going crazy  :P Forgot to say that they boxes are also running suricata, cron and system patches as packages.

Another thing to add… Went and downloaded the fresh install iso for 2.2. Built a brand new vm on ESXi 5.5 and tried using vmxnet3 drivers.  pfSense detected them fine, but the up/down status detection totally wrong and would not respond to pings or web console.  Reverted to legacy e1000 and no problems at all. Another gotchya.

@marcelloc: @beyondcrazy: Sooo… I reverted to fresh 2.2, then started loading all the parts of the upgraded 2.2 config, one at at time, using the dropdown menu for 'restore area'. I didn't even notice that menu option before. But it turned out to be a life saver. IMHO, this is the best way to upgrade if possible to sysadmin. I completely agree. @marcelloc: @beyondcrazy: Using the broken 2.2 upgraded config, I restored aliases, dhcp server, firewall rules, interfaces, nat, rrd data, and static routes. Rebooted, and it worked great. I was mostly back to where I was in 2.1.5. I did have to manually create my fw schedules, but otherwise, it works great. I also was able to export the now working 2.2 config, and load it into a fresh 2.2 system w/o any difficulties. It would seem that some aspect of the upgrade is broken. But if you can at least get the web interface up and dump the config, you can then load specific pieces of the upgraded config into a clean 2.2 system. It's far from perfect, but it works pretty well. On the good side – CPU utilization is improved for the kvm instance -- cpu utilization would be at 50% for the vm, but pfsense only reported approx 10ish%. Now, they seem to be much more aligned -- 10% in vm guest is 10-15% on host. For those of you using kvm, you still have to use the hw.mca.enabled="0" trick to boot. Otherwise, it seems to be running more smoothly, at least over the last few hours. Excellent product! Can you create a diff between upgraded config to configured 2.2 config? This could help core to to find bugs on config migration tool. I could, but almost every line is going to get flagged. While the data itself might be similar, the order of the config lines varies quite a bit between the two files. I'm happy to provide anonymous version of both files if it will help. Jon

Thanks. that is not enabled.