This is what you get (ignore the rebooting line on the top, I had just rebooted the unit prior to that): [image: pfsensesetbootcam.png] The whole boot sequence after BIOS post can be seen and interacted with (in the screencap, I was hacking in something to make my thumbdrive install work).

TBH, the current revisions of 2.0 (i386) are extremely stable once you configure it properly for what you need.  I've found that most of the revisions add little things but the benefits are tremendous over 1.2.3. Personally, I've been on the Aug beta 4 builds in production environments and haven't seen a need to actually upgrade.  Everything works except that RRD queue graphs are shot once the shaper is reconfigured.  A removal of the queue graphs and refreshing of the RRD script fixes it and since the traffic shaper is almost never reconfigured once it works, that's fine for me.

It is not straightforward (unless you already know your way around the FreeBSD kernel). I'm not prepared to put in the time I anticipate (or fear) it would require. From my perspective, you would be better off getting yourself a supported NIC but if you insist on modifying the existing driver I suggest you put together a pfSense build environment, modify the udav driver source code to recognise the required USB device ids, rebuild the kernel and copy to your pfSense box. There is documentation online for creating the pfSense build environment.

@onkeldave83: yes this is all right, but ich hav a 32mb graficcard and 4gb ram! the rest of my chips not over 900mb! therefore openbsd should shows me 3.8 or 3.9 gb ram, but it shows me only 3! As already discussed, you haven't allowed for chipset, cpu and i/o device requirements for memory addresses. This is explained in more detail in the references I posted in an earlier reply. Summary: If you want much more than 3GB RAM you have to use the 64-bit OS. Your system should be able to boot it and install it to hard drive.

Thanks for your continued assistance.  I'm just trying to visualize the setup.  I'm trying to ensure that we make the best use of our bandwith without adding any additional delay in the response to and from us and our clients. -saige-

I have following modem: http://www.option.com/en/products/products/wireless-data-cards/globetrotter-gt-max-hsupa-w/specifications/#start I used it before on Debian, it works, but had to modify AT/ATZ commands to get it connect. Didn't tried with pfSense.. YET :>

How big load is on these interfaces? Did You read this? http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,29797.0.html

I would recomend going for something more powerful. If you ever decide to use any other pfsense feature you'll soon find yourself running out processing cycles and/or ram. Some of the fanless atom boards are nice and not too expenssive. The triple lan requirement is limiting. Jetway offer a 3xlan daugterboard for their atom boards. If you have a VLAN capable switch you could just use that for interfaces. Steve

Would Pfsense be a good choice? Which hardware should we choose to also cater for a future 100/100? Are there any good pre-integrated boxes, perhaps even for rack mount? of course :). For newcomers to pfSense I recommend using a old / spare PC with intel nic's before buying new stuff.

Do you have hands on experience on those? Nope ( looking for a sponsor :) ) The reason why I find the vlan option worth mentioning is that in most home cases you would have a switch behind it anyway. The same goes for the wifi. The green count (nature vs euros)  1 watt a year running 24-7-365 cost around 2€ almost 3€ here in Denmark. The watt different between a fit-pc vs mini-itx is around 30 watt. So with the normal lifespan 3-5 years, it mounts up to 180-300€ saved on the power bill.

Sure. As long as you aren't running any packages that require the full version.

P.S.: I also wanted to know it's this OS easier to run and maintain in comparison with - Slackware for example (Slackware in console mode without graphical interface )  Huh Configuration is almost web gui only. As pfSense is a strip down version of FreeBSD it limits the need for upgrades. Security issue will be posted on http://blog.pfsense.org/

I have installed 2.0b4 for testing and here is /dev/lpt0. So in 1.2.3 the parallel Port is not included

perfect!

@jboard146: Is there a usb nic that is known to work? Also does the ubiquiti sr71 work? It is an atheros based card not sure which one. I'm running 2.0 beta4 full install on an ALIX2 board. I have a Trendnet TU-ET100C     * Ethernet chipset: ADMtek ADM8511 "Pegasus II" which works in 2.0 beta4 rk

It defaults to 10,000 on 1.2.3;  only in 2.0 does it actually vary (conservatively) according to the amount of system memory.  You can, of course, change the value. For example, I have a Conroe-Celeron @ 1.2GHz w/ 1GB of ram and changed the default value to 500,000.  Bear in mind that I don't run any packages - just using it as a NAT router with an oversized state table & HFSC (main reason why I didn't go for SoC based stuff like Microtik or running Vyatta for that matter). Running 3 torrents on one client, I managed a little over 130,000 states but the unit is holding up well: [image: pfstates2.png]