It may be possible to load that kernel module into pfSense. It may only load against their custom kernel. Try it and see.

Since it's binary only there's no way to rebuild a pfSense kernel with it included.

Any pfSense firmware update that changes the kernel could potentially break it. It's likely to be a nightmare IMO.  :-\

It seems odd that it's opensource in Linux though….

Steve

Hmm… Maybe I am not understanding the question, but how about something like:

https://ark.intel.com/products/39776/Intel-Ethernet-Converged-Network-Adapter-X520-DA2

Paired with something like:

https://www.fs.com/products/29849.html

I think the chipset on this card is supported by pfSense and Intel cards are not picky about the transceiver brand.

Edit:

Or better yet:

https://www.fs.com/products/36432.html

Compatible with both 1 Gig and 10 Gig.

Carlos

Hey Claudio69, nice one. Thanks for that, I’ll check on ebay.

Regards
Michael

Probably no way to tell unless the seller gives a boot log. Even then it's unclear to me.

You might consider this: https://store.netgate.com/MBT-2220-system.aspx

Completely different form factor and only 2 interfaces but I don't know what your requirements are.

The MBT would have not problem at 200/50.

Steve

Consile not accessible, even from direct connect USB.

Sending it in for service.

Thanks for reply.

As far as i'm aware there is nothing out of the box for that. You'll have to build your own package.

Thank You for your responce.

I have decided to go with what the PFsense box that I have and upgrade later.

Again
Thank You.

No tuning is going to get you from 60Mbps to 1Gbps. There is something fundamentally wrong there like a bad cable or a bad port. CPU stuck at 100MHz or something….

Check the Status > Interfaces page for errors.

Steve

What CPU is in that? The specs I'm seeing look like a 3GHz i5 in which case both those numbers look way too low.

Steve

This seems completely unrelated to the first post. How is this relevant?  ???

Steve

You can disable the http-referer check from the command line by running:

Though that shouldn't be required and the check is there for a good reason.

Steve

Well it could be a number of things. Probably something I'm not even aware of.  ;)

In all honesty it will probably be quicker and easier to get a modem that is known to work already or just use an external 3g/4g device that connects via Ethernet.

Steve

Hmm, I would expect that device to be recognised by the ath driver:
https://github.com/pfsense/FreeBSD-src/blob/a595f803281ea3b25079c9d04a3f5b9a3f0b8a52/sys/dev/ath/ath_hal/ah_devid.h#L84

Check the boot log for errors when it tries to attach.

Steve

Can you generate traffic via the Asus without using wifi? Via the switch ports there of from the device itself?

Wifi in inherently prone to errors just due to random interference, reflections etc. If you have a wifi interface in pfSense directly for example you will always see some errors on it. However I would expect to see most of those layer 1 type errors on the Asus and not passed to pfSense. Anything at layer 2 may be though, if you have the AP connected at L2.

Broadcom Ethernet was never anywhere near as bad as wifi. In fact they were second to Intel for a while IMO. If you can use an Intel NIC though you should.

Can you try putting a switch in between pfSense and the Asus device? That would rule out some obscure incompatibility.

Steve

If u think a dedicated pfs box is expensive compare the alternative, what does it cost you to buy one of those rules based, state full Internet Appliances. Ya, an old PC/VM should hold u over, until u can afford to do it the proper way.