Same here.  The current 1.3 wouldn't boot for me with the same error.  1.2.1 RC1 loaded just fine.

There are a number of USB ethernet adapters supported by FreeBSD and hence pfSense. I've been using a DM9601 based USB ethernet adapter as the WAN interface on my home gateway to the internet for a couple of weeks now and it seems to work fine. I use it for the WAN interface because its a USB 1.1 device (max speed 12Mbps) and my broadband seems to max out at a bit over 6Mbps download and 1Mbps upload. There are some USB 2.0 (max speed 480Mbps) ethernet adapters around which would probably be more suitable for use as "LAN" interfaces. From what I've read, adapters based on the ADM8515 are USB 2.0 capable but I suspect not yet supported by a FreeBSD driver. If I remember correctly, the axe driver supports at least one other USB 2.0 adapter. You should probably be working with the 1.2.1 RC versions of pfSense to get the most up to date hardware support. Unfortunately I've found there is at least one DM9601 based device which are not recognised by the udav driver in the 1.2.1 kits I've tried.

Followup #3: Loaded pfSense latest snapshot, and IP330 is STILL trap 12 crashing!!!

first thing that came to mind is running of the CF card….could be bad...But you see both machines do this and you also uplug the nics and it corrects it self. WOW I'm stumped on that one. Have you tryed booting from CD? Still need to unplug nics? If not reload you config and try again.

I'm going to assume you mean WAN by WLAN. I'm going to take another guess that your Modem is running nat. The first thing you need to do is use a different network for the LAN. If you WAN is on 192.168.1.x, then use 192.168.100.x or something- just don't use the same as the WAN. /* begin IP 101 digression The devices that are directly reachable from an interface are determined by the IP address and the subnet mask. If an interface is set to 192.168.1.1/24 it means that 192.168.1.1-192.168.1.254 are reachable from that interface. If the other interface is set to 192.168.1.2/24, then it will try to send traffic for 192.168.1.1-192.168.1.254 out THAT interface. Both interfaces think the same machines are connected to them- this makes the firewall insane and useless. end IP 101 digression*/ If you can get past this point, you might want to do a little more reading to see if you can turn off nat on the modem and get rid of the double-nat.

First a question for the OP:  Where did you buy your card? We got ours at techforless.com and they are not cooperating.  Neither is Intel. Here is what I know: You can get the basic ethernet to work by adding the PCI ID's to the e1000e-0.4.1.7 driver that you can download from intel.  A little hacking in e1000e_hw.h and netdev.c but it works. Second, you can get some bypass functions sorta working using the drivers from silicom.co.il for their 83571EB based cards.  I would recommend getting someone else card, silicom or interfacemasters.com.  Intel certainly doesn't want to support this product.

@val123456: Another option is a "consumer grade" Inspiron.  I'm in the states, and the 530 is often VERY cheap.  I got the small form factor case, popped three extra intel NICs in it (standard size, one PCIe, two PCI, I just removed the brackets to make them fit :-). Note:  1.2 did not seem to like the built-in Intel NIC, but the 1.2.1 releases are working fine. Colin Niiiiice :P !!! I checked this right now, and it seems nice !!! Thank you for the advice !

Many thanks for your clarifications. @wallabybob: You're not in luck with the Motorola WLAN adapter. None of the standard WLAN drivers recognised it. The clue is the ugen0 in vga0: <generic isa="" vga="">at port 0x3c0-0x3df iomem 0xa0000-0xbffff on isa0 ugen0: <cybertan 0="" 2="" motorola="" wireless="" usb="" adapter,="" class="" 0,="" rev="" 2.00="" 0.00,="" addr="">on uhub0 Timecounters tick every 1.000 msec</cybertan></generic> ugen is a "generic" USB device driver, not a network device driver.

thank you so much! ;D @GruensFroeschli: Try reading the stickies, the docs and the faq: http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,7001.0.html In your case the doc on how to set up pfSense on a WRAP should be the right thing to start with. http://pfsense.basis06.com/download//tutorials/wrap_install/wrap_install.htm

haha thank you. Just wanted to check…. So I have room to grow. Good to know. Thanks

Have you considered the new Via Processor yet? I’m not a big fan of Via but the new “Mini”-processor looks quite decent: http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/atom-nano-review.ars (yes, it does use more power but take a peek at the benchmarks.)

Thanks friend

Shouldn't cause any stability issues unless/until it kills sectors on your CF. BIG_ILLEGAL_REQUEST is "normal", it might show up but it should still go on. If it doesn't, it probably isn't related to that message. See http://devwiki.pfsense.org/wikka.php?wakka=BootTroubleShooting

If it works in FreeBSD 7.0, it'll work in 1.2.1.

It's mostly dependent on throughput required.  See: http://www.pfsense.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=52&Itemid=49

We're not really sure which ones are supported. You can check and see what's supported in lcdproc, everything but the picolcd hardware should work. We'll probably put a call for LCD hardware out to solicit contributions so we can really put our lcdproc package to the test and enhance it. Might see that on the blog in the next month or so.

It might be overheating as well. You didn't mention having a hard drive in the case, that's the only time I've seen 4801's have heat related issues, but occasionally adding a hard drive will increase the temp enough to make them unstable under high load as the CPU generates more heat as well. If you've eliminated the power supply, and overheating isn't an issue, it's definitely a flaky board.

If it works in 1.3 it'll work in 1.2.1.