@RobbieTT said in Enhanced Intel SpeedStep / Speed Shift - Are they fully supported?:

@Sergei_Shablovsky
It's just iPerf generating or receiving traffic. In this specific example I am just using it with the GUI that is iPerfUtil but it remains iPerf under the easy controls so it works with any other iPerf network client.

Thank You for answering!

Do You testing iPerfUtil with iperf3?

Could You be so please to give me a link on iPerfUtil ?

Thank You!

@stephenw10 said in Quectel EP06-E LTE Module changes pfSense+ NID after cold start or hard reset:

AT+QCFG=“usbnet

After all, the Modem will respond to " AT+QCFG="usbnet",? "

@alleykat said in Normal Operating Temp NG-4200:

How do you reset RRD?

In Status > Monitoring > Settings (Advanced).

The default value for SpeedShift is 80.

At the command line run:

echo 'if_re_load="YES"' >> /boot/loader.conf.local echo 'if_re_name="/boot/modules/if_re.ko"' >> /boot/loader.conf.local

You can manually create ZFS snapshots at the CLI in CE, assuming you are running ZFS. However there are no public 2.8-dev snapshots yet.

@stephenw10 yeah. It's a FreeBSD issue. Amdtemp only supports families up to 17h. The 5700G is 19h.

ECC RAM is a nice to have thing and or but for a 24/7 running device it
makes sense. The TPM module I am using in the PC Engines APU6B4
I was able to buy one from Dasharo, I was soldering a 10 Pin header
on the bard and then I connect the TPM module there, together with
the latest BIOS version (19.01) the BIOS recognizes the TPM module
but pfSense itselfs is not taking any advantage of the TPM module.

Perhaps with the next BIOS it could be something is on change at
this point.

@stephenw10 Hi Stephen,
Just to say after so much trouble with this, I learnt that a work colleague of mine had the FS BOX which I just borrowed to recode the SFPs to Intel. As soon as I had done that and plugged them in, they came to life immediately without any need for tunables or other tweaks to get the link working. It's working on autoselect / autodetect with a fresh install of pfSense.

Thank you so much for helping me out with this, but I hope this thread is of use to others: any recent FreeBSD install or security appliance designed on top of FreeBSD using Intel SFPs, you really need Intel-coded SFPs otherwise it just won't work!

@coxhaus Only floating rules have a direction.

WAN/LAN/etc are only for inbound packets on that interface.

Unbound can forward, but if you do that uncheck the DNSSEC option which is on by default.

Yes, I only found one system here that reports that sysctl. And it probably shouldn't!

On most of those devices (except the 1100) the LEDs are closest to the PCB. In the 6100 and 8200 (and 4100) the PCB is above the ports to allow for a larger heatsink below it.

Well still no but I don't think that's that's same thing. They appear to be available only for Cortex-M CPUs and it's not clear to me if they can be updated after build.

Hmm, so it only fails to reconnect when coming out of standby?

The system could be holding the NIC powered to allow WoL etc. There may be some BIOS settings to disable that.

@stephenw10

Ahhh. I didn't realize this was solved. Thought OP was still having issues.

OK, turns out I couldn't ping because my ISP had to provision my router. I had to go through port by port until they could finally see my MAC address. Turns out port 6 is igb1. What a huge pain in the neck... Anyway, now I can ping.

Next, I just left the ethernet cable from my PC in one port and just changed the interface assignment for the LAN port until I found the assignment that lets me access the web gui. So port 7 is igb2 and I can access the web gui using a static IP - but I can also pull an IP via DHCP. I guess I'll repeat that until I've mapped all the ports.

Thanks for the help, everyone!

Not on Netgate hardware, pfSense Plus is included.

@Finger79 And a big thanks from me who forgot to put JPME2 back again after flashing with the same results…

Is that actually the same server you're testing against? The ping time looks different.

The default queue doesn't seem to present any restriction from what information you have given us. It wouldn't affect downloads at all since the only queue it can hit is outbound on the WAN. So you should be seeing much better than that from the firewall itself.

Right because it now is the default so you don't need to set it. You can try setting it to something different as a test if you want but I don't believe it will make any difference.