Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Wireless card compatibility with pfsense

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
    27 Posts 8 Posters 18.5k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • stephenw10S
      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
      last edited by

      Atheros is simply the best supported wireless hardware in FreeBSD. Largely that is due to the efforts of one man: http://wiki.freebsd.org/AdrianChadd  though I'm sure he'd be the first to tell you there were many contributions from others.

      I agree that there will always be some delay getting hardware support in FOSS that is usually because manufacturers do not provide drivers or datasheets. Thus much has to be worked out from the ground up.
      FreeBSD is usually somewhat behind Linux in this respect simply because there are less people hacking on stuff for it. Lastly pfSense is behind FreeBSD as applying the various patches and scripts to a FreeBSD release takes time and effort.

      Thus pfSense 2.0.1 is built on FreeBSD 8.1 which was released in July 2010 but hardware support was likely finalised sometime before that and even at that time it will have been behind whatever Linux was supporting. So, yes, 3 years is probably a good guess.  ;)

      Steve

      P.S. Your first link above is wrong. Fixed.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • jimpJ
        jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
        last edited by

        There may not be pci-e cards, but there are mini-pci-e cards and you can find mini-pci-e to pci-e adapters around.

        Also the drivers in 2.1-BETA are much newer and more likely to support recent cards, especially from Atheros.

        Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

        Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

        Do not Chat/PM for help!

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • N
          ntsux
          last edited by

          @gderf:

          The general consensus around here seems to be that an ethernet connected access point is a better choice than an internal card. It's certainly easier, is fully portable, it doesn't depend on any drivers.

          I couldn't agree more.  pfSense has a lot of tasty eggs in its basket, and the fact that the wireless functionality exists is what makes the product so awesome.  But, in this case, I will go with an external wireless AP.

          Some main challenges remain with finding an ideal external AP, though.  For me:

          (1) find one that doles out DHCP settings to its wireless clients, where it doesn't insist that the AP itself be the default gateway, or at least give you the option to point somewhere else, (such as your pfSense box), for your default gateway.  The AP would obviously be bridged to LAN subnet of your pfSense box.

          (2) find one that supports simultaneous dual band, and still does (1)

          (3) find one that supports MSSID (I need lots of SSIDs (multiple guest-type access solutions per physical AP), with each SSID associated with a distinct VLAN & subnet), as well as does (1) as well as (2)

          (4) find one supports the wireless AC standard (OK, this is truly a nice to have, but… I still want it).  I will even risk the fact that AC is not yet ratified.

          These features all exist on various AP platforms, but I have yet to find ONE that supports ALL of these in one unit.  I have been looking at http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833168130 , but have yet to confirm it can do (1).

          … hope I didn't take us too far off on a tangent here...

          NT SUX

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • D
            doktornotor Banned
            last edited by

            1, 2/ You do NOT want DHCP running on your AP, so just scratch it.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • N
              ntsux
              last edited by

              @doktornotor:

              1, 2/ You do NOT want DHCP running on your AP, so just scratch it.

              So… how would I send DHCP data to the wireless clients connecting to the AP?  Are are you referring to the actual IP of the AP - that would be static.  To be clear, it's the DHCP daemon I am referring to - not the client - on the AP itself.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • D
                doktornotor Banned
                last edited by

                Uhm, you enable DHCP server on pfSense.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • N
                  ntsux
                  last edited by

                  @doktornotor:

                  Uhm, you enable DHCP server on pfSense.

                  I have a feeling you're trying to be helpful, rather than condescending.

                  I also have a requirement for MSSID, with each instance mapped to a unique VLAN/subnet.    Not sure pfSense can accommodate this with regard to DHCP.

                  So, to simplify things, perhaps this would call for a solution where the AP itself is also a router (rather than a bridge), with its WAN NIC on the pfSense LAN subnet.  An extra hop is added, I  guess, but it's internal, so it should be negligible.  This would resolve the DHCP "issue".

                  Thanks for your input.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • D
                    doktornotor Banned
                    last edited by

                    Rather depends on the AP wifi and firmware. I can imagine this would be doable with some Atheros-based box and DD-WRT.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • stephenw10S
                      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                      last edited by

                      @ntsux:

                      I also have a requirement for MSSID, with each instance mapped to a unique VLAN/subnet.    Not sure pfSense can accommodate this with regard to DHCP.

                      Why not? The usual arrangement here would be to have the access point mapping each virtual access point to a different VLAN with all the VLANs trunked to pfSense. pfSense is then configured with those VLANs such that each VAP appears to be a separate interface complete with DHCP server, firewall rules etc.

                      Steve

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • N
                        ntsux
                        last edited by

                        @stephenw10:

                        @ntsux:

                        I also have a requirement for MSSID, with each instance mapped to a unique VLAN/subnet.    Not sure pfSense can accommodate this with regard to DHCP.

                        Why not? The usual arrangement here would be to have the access point mapping each virtual access point to a different VLAN with all the VLANs trunked to pfSense. pfSense is then configured with those VLANs such that each VAP appears to be a separate interface complete with DHCP server, firewall rules etc.

                        Steve

                        OK great - then I have some reading to do.  Not quite sure where the .1q trunks are set up in pfsense, and how they correlate to the number of sub-interfaces I will require on the physical NIC (on the pfsense box) associated with the  AP.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • W
                          wallabybob
                          last edited by

                          @ntsux:

                          Not quite sure where the .1q trunks are set up in pfsense,

                          Nowhere as such. If you are using a particular physical interface as a "trunk", go to Interfaces -> (assign), click on the VLANs tab, click on "+" to create a VLAN you wish to add and fill in the details, click Save then click on the Interface assignments tab and click "+" to add the VLAN to the pfSense pool of interfaces. Your VLAN interface will now have an OPTx style name (OPT1, OPT2, etc) and you then go to Interfaces -> OPTx and fill in the details such as IP address etc then go to Firewall -> Rules to add rules to control traffic and then (optionally) go to Services -> DHCP Server to configure DHCP services on the VLAN.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • N
                            ntsux
                            last edited by

                            @wallabybob:

                            @ntsux:

                            Not quite sure where the .1q trunks are set up in pfsense,

                            Nowhere as such. If you are using a particular physical interface as a "trunk", go to Interfaces -> (assign), click on the VLANs tab, click on "+" to create a VLAN you wish to add and fill in the details, click Save then click on the Interface assignments tab and click "+" to add the VLAN to the pfSense pool of interfaces. Your VLAN interface will now have an OPTx style name (OPT1, OPT2, etc) and you then go to Interfaces -> OPTx and fill in the details such as IP address etc then go to Firewall -> Rules to add rules to control traffic and then (optionally) go to Services -> DHCP Server to configure DHCP services on the VLAN.

                            If I am understanding you correctly, this method sounds analogous to a method for creating a sub-interface on the physical NIC in other products.  Therefore, I should create each additional "Optx" interface that I require, ensure that the MAC matches the original physical NIC, and map the isolated VLANs (and the subnets contained within each VLAN) to what I have created in my AP via the trunk.  And then create a suitable policy/rule set for each one I create.

                            Having the ability to run a distinct DCHP daemon per sub-interface is an awesome option!

                            Thanks very much! Can't wait to try it out!

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • stephenw10S
                              stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                              last edited by

                              Sounds like you have the idea.  Have fun! :)

                              Steve

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.