Almost any new laptop is likely to have 802.11N wifi which will probably not be supported by pfSense. You would be better off looking for a laptop with wifi on a mini pci or pci-e card so you can swap it for an older, supported, model. Steve

You don't need a WOL cable if the motherboard is PCI2.2 or newer. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake_on_lan#Hardware_implementations In fact reading through that whole page will be helpful. It's very easy to get something wrong resulting in it not working!  ::) pfSense has an SMP kernel it should recognise and use dual processors. Steve

@pcexhaust: I'm not sure if this matter since my math (P=IV) says that the ALFA cards require .2amps each. First, your math doesn't actually apply the way you think it applies; the high output rates on the AWUS036H's is something similar to EIRP, i.e. a translation of dBm, and thus the antenna gain is factored in; it's not pure power draw.  Whether ALFA actually accounted for connector/cable losses is another question, however.  Look it up by FCC ID on the FCC.gov site to get a more accurate idea of the actual initial power.

I got a Netgear GS105E like you recommended and am sure glad I did. :) I looked at some cheaper switches before I found a store that carried it (Staples), but it's hard to put a price on a headache and didn't want to end up with some rinkydink operation that would be nothing but. I already had the pfSense box set up and it was as simple as hooking up the cables, powering up the switch, and booting up the computers. Subnet addresses were assigned automagically by the pfSense box and by the time I had the last one booted up the first one was already online. It couldn't have been easier. Thanks again for pointing me in the right direction, I really appreciate it.

According to Intel: Compatible with x4, x8, and x16 full-height and low-profile PCI Express* slots http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/network-adapters/gigabit-network-adapters/pro-1000-pt-dp.html I use mine in a x16 PCI Express slot.

With that many connections on that weak of a CPU, I wouldn't expect anything better especially depending on how much traffic you're pushing through your 81 active P2s. That's a class of hardware you'd find software-restricted to 5 or 10 VPNs on commercial firewalls. Nothing you change will make any difference, the crypto cards perform the same regardless of which cipher (assuming you're talking about a hifn, if it's the onboard glxsb, you can only use AES 128 with it).

It is possible to run pfSense on MIPS if you have a way to build it and fix up the builder scripts to work for it.  If someone made a usable pfSense image for a MIPS device (which would need to be built special for the model of the device you would run it on), it would need to be for a device that has at least 128 MB of RAM and a way to connect external storage (some do exist).

You should be able to use either though some of those Kingston drives have a nasty reputation, looks like the 8GB version though. Personally I would use the NanoBSD install and see how it goes. If you find it too restrictive you can always switch to a full install later. Steve

Broadcom NIC should be fine. I used a dual port Broadcom NIC for a previous build without any issues or tweaks.

Ooo one more thing.  The aluminum block on the processor could cool better.  Another Jason Litka recommendation: http://www.xoxide.com/swiftech-mc14-copper-bga-ramsinks.html I think you get 8 of them in one kit.  Both Jason and I put 4 on top of the aluminum block to dissipate heat. @periko: Thanks guys for your input, I will try this machine for the company network, thanks!!!

I've listed these on ebay for sale http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/130685435059?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1586.l2649 If anyones interested

@dreamslacker: IMO, the main hurdle for adopting pfSense for SOHO/ SMB setups now would be unconditionally stable wireless (N) support.  I just install a cheap, mid-high performance Wifi router as an AP these days rather than to try and source a stable working wireless module. Very true.  In my case, the wireless is just used for laptops and smartphones whose most bandwidth-intensive tasks are watching Youtube videos of lolcats – any file transfers or other serious tasks are going to occur between the hardwired desktops (or worst case scenario, I can temporarily plug in the laptop).  When N support does finally arrive for pfSense, it'll be fantastic, but I can live without until then :D

Thanks for all your help and suggestions, guys. Going to order the stuff and start building ;-)

So… I ordered this particular card, and just snapped it in tonight.  Hop onto the web config interface, add an interface, and get ath0 :) Within half an hour, I've gotten an 802.11g access point up and running with WPA2-AES, and have successfully connected and gotten online with it (its WAN port is actually connected via ethernet to my current router, which is connected to the internet on its WAN port). pfSense FTW!

Anything really will work but try to go Intel for better compatibility. I would go for something with dual redundant PSUs too. You wouldn't need that much CPU power either so even something 2nd hand could do the trick. Personaly I use Supermicro as I find them to be very reliable and well engineered. maybe look at a 1u socket 1156 or 1155 server?

hey there, I know it sounds like a step backwards but it may be worth replacing your card and drives with something very generic and SATA based. Chances are it will be more compatible and you can reuse the card and drives elsewhere since having fast disks is of no use at all to PFsense.

i have obtain an ZyDAS adaptater but when i setting it, i go a reboot and all time the machine gone the loading again reboot …

Oops! I phrased that badly.  :-[ The CPU in the Xbox 360 is indeed an [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenon_%28processor%29]IBM Xenon, as you originally wrote. It is Power PC architecture. I was pointing out that it is very different from Intel's Xeon processor which is X86 (64) architecture. Steve

@stephenw10: @luckylinux: Do you think I could run the phone along these two wires too or the phone needs more ? Sorry, I'm not an expert, and normally there are the phone plugs but here … no, just two wires  :D. Furthermore I'm not sure it's worth to call an electrician that I'd have to pay. You are more likely to get a phone connection down some old wires than DSL. The speed of DSL is very dependant on the signal quality which in turn is dependent on the length and quality of the wiring between you and the exchange. It can be badly effected even by one bad connection. However you definitely only need two wires to get both phone and DSL connections. I should point out that I'm in the UK so although this stuff is generally applicable across the pond the socket wiring scheme is different. There's plenty of US info out there though, e.g.: http://www.wire-your-phones.com/ Steve Thank you and sorry for my late reply. I think at the moment I do not want to spend extra money for a secondary connection. Maybe in the near future, but I'd like them to confirm me the DSL works good enough.

That's all true. The PCI bus is limited to 133MBps as you say. There are quite few P4 systems that use a PCI-X bus (64bit at 66MHz) for this reason, some systems have a special bus for network cards. I would only use a P4 if I happened to have one already (I have several  ::)) the cost of much faster machines is now so low it's not worth it. Thanks for the shout!  ;D Steve