the only issue I've seen with SMP is in multi wan configs,  the slbd process which does the load balancing will run away with one of the cores for some reason, and/or spawn multiple instances  on the SMP kernel.  This didn't seem to be a show stopper on my box, but I wasn't running snort or ntop or other cpu intensive things. This apparently will be gone with 1.3 as they transition off slbd I believe

I split this out into a new post, don't hijack other threads please.

@cmb: FreeBSD 6.3 probably works better with this NIC. There is a pfSense 1.2 with a FreeBSD 6.3 base available here:  http://cvs.pfsense.org/~sullrich/testing_images/6/FreeBSD_RELENG_6_3/pfSense_RELENG_1_2/ that several thousand people have downloaded to use with newer hardware and it's proven to work well. The 1.2.1 release will be based on 6.3 as well, snapshots will be coming soon. This is probably your only hope of ever getting it working. For more info why it's so, search and read the topics concerning the new intel atom board.

Ah, my brother! I asked a similar question a month or so ago and got a rather rude response from one of the "Hero's" on here.  Regardless, I think it will be very difficult to tweak PFSense to do this.  However, you can get Ubuntu 8.04 installed on it and then the skies the limit.  I'm working on setting one up as an Asterisk system for my house.  I made some notes about how to do this here: http://www.thecruftofmybrain.com/2008/05/07/raqbuntu-lives/ I might still try to do something with PFSense but I think it's going to be very challenging. Pretty decent small PC's for about $30 on ebay.  It's hard to resist finding something for them to do.

It does, and apparently I just got really unlucky on the batch of computers I chose to test with. I went through the BIOS and disabled everything from serial to parallel and audio, and it seems to boot now. I'm pretty sure ACPI was already disabled but now it looks like it boots and is running fine. I'll try with the other ones and see if I have the same fix. I walked the virtual BIOS for VMWare but I didn't find any settings for that. Thinking back, I've used VMWare to prep USB flash drives for deployment, but I don't think I ever booted to them in VMWare after the install.

Any update on the HeroLogic hardware?

I know the cardbus PCI card does work because I have pluged it into a windows machine and all functions well. I will try that command tonight and post the output.

@wallabybob: Another datapoint about Realtek NICs. I also have a Jetway mini-ITX board, but a 627F series board with a single onboard VIA Rhine 10/100 NIC. I purchased the single 10/100 port daughter board which has a Realtek 8139 10/100 NIC. FWIW, 627F here also but with the addition of the 3x1Gb lan daughter board. Despite the extra 3 potential ports, I built it out as a 'router-on-a-stick' using only the main embedded port and VLANs. New pfSense user and I just completed the install and initial testing (looks stable so far). Tomorrow begins production use so I don't know yet how it will hold up to load. If all goes well, I plan on testing configs using the extra ports (versus ROAS) to see how it affects throughput and CPU load. Great service from "logic supply" on the equipement.

@Rusty64bit: The re driver in 6.3rel should support the card re – RealTek 8139C+/8169/816xS/811xS/8101E PCI/PCIe Ethernet adapter driver Unfortunately, it doesn't. For more information see this thread (click).

The ports need to be on the same broadcast domain. That can be accommodated (or not properly accommodated) with a L2 or L3 switch.

Might be a quirk in your motherboard's ACPI. I'd try upgrading the BIOS first if it isn't the latest. If that doesn't change anything, try disabling ACPI in pfSense.

It's not possible for any OS to "not recognize the processor" and run at some slower speed. Output from what top shows would be helpful in determining what's happening.

You can also try pfSense based on FreeBSD 6.3 (the current release, 1.2 is based on FreeBSD 6.2). FreeBSD 6.3 often supports newer hardware a lot better than FreeBSD 6.2. You can grab images here: http://cvs.pfsense.org/~sullrich/testing_images/6/FreeBSD_RELENG_6_3/pfSense_RELENG_1_2/

it worked wonders for me and got my other broadcomm nic up and running.  No issues at this point and is extreally stable. RC

Speed parameters were all good. Tried another CF (the third, 1 GB) and all worked. I was really in anxiety… Thanks for the quick response and my excuses (I shoud have tried more...) Fridaynoon

@David_W: Matts is running the SMP kernel - but only one processor is being detected for some reason. Matts - post the dmesg. That should give a much better idea of what's happening. Hi David, I first have to check the BIOS settings later this week if I'm at the Firewall place. I know that I have tested it months ago on a compaq to see what happened with different settings in for the OS in the BIOS… it might be that again, before it was OK, but I think I have to change things. I will keep you guys posted.

Seems to finally be working.  The performance seems to be good.  One thing to note,  I had snort working but it stopped, under 6.2 release 1.2.  I ran for a couple of hours on 6.3 and now has stopped.  The snort release is 2.7.0.1_4. Overall it seems to be a very stable release. RC

Might be possible with our lcdproc package, not sure if that specific LCD is supported or not.

@Cojo: I'm currently running my pfsense on a via mini-itx board with dual nics. I only have one pci slot available so my question is if just one INTEL PRO 1000 GT will increase my thoughput? As it is now I have only a throughput around 60mbit on my 100mbit connection. It will to some extent, but not as much as replacing all the NICs. The Intel cards do more on the card and require less of the CPU. Since it sounds like you're maxing out the CPU, replacing one of the NICs will lower your CPU usage (or allow you to push more traffic before pegging the CPU). But not nearly as much as replacing both would. I'm not sure exactly how much benefit this will provide since you can't replace both NICs, but it should have some measurable benefit. If you try it, let us know how much more you can get through the box after doing so.

@sentofuno: SOHO users regard the alix/wrap boards, and admins of larger networks find them lacking Depends on how you define "larger networks".  :)  If you're doing NAT, firewalling, a little VPN, and don't consistently need more than 75 Mb of Internet throughput or 10 Mb of VPN throughput, and have fewer than 500 machines you'll be fine with an ALIX.