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

    Hardware for using pfsense as a managed switch?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
    42 Posts 12 Posters 14.0k 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.
    • jahonixJ Offline
      jahonix
      last edited by

      @bingo600:

      J9783A  HP 2530-8
      J9780A  HP 2530-8-POE+

      Great, those have 8x 10/100 Base-TX Ports and 2x 10/100/1000 Base-TX.
      Who buys FastEthernet in 2017 if you don't need a zillion ports cheap?

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • bingo600B Offline
        bingo600
        last edited by

        @jahonix:

        @bingo600:

        J9783A  HP 2530-8
        J9780A  HP 2530-8-POE+

        Great, those have 8x 10/100 Base-TX Ports and 2x 10/100/1000 Base-TX.
        Who buys FastEthernet in 2017 if you don't need a zillion ports cheap?

        I don't know who wants FE , and i did corect the links & prod names to the -G version before i saw your post.

        If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a 👍 - "thumbs up"

        pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

        QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
        CPU  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
        LAN  : 4 x Intel 211, Disk  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • T Offline
          TS_b Banned
          last edited by

          A CLI is probably not particularly useful for a home network.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • bingo600B Offline
            bingo600
            last edited by

            @TS_b:

            A CLI is probably not particularly useful for a home network.

            What does a CLI have to do with home networking ?
            I'd prefer a CLI anytime, but that's a user preference , not where it's used.

            But the learningcurve for using the CLI could be challenging for some.

            /Bingo

            If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a 👍 - "thumbs up"

            pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

            QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
            CPU  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
            LAN  : 4 x Intel 211, Disk  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • ? This user is from outside of this forum
              Guest
              last edited by

              I'd take a CLI any day. Sure, it must not be a shitty CLI, but that goes for any interface.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • I Offline
                Inxsible
                last edited by

                @bingo600:

                @TS_b:

                A CLI is probably not particularly useful for a home network.

                What does a CLI have to do with home networking ?
                I'd prefer a CLI anytime, but that's a user preference , not where it's used.

                But the learningcurve for using the CLI could be challenging for some.

                /Bingo

                Cha ching !!

                I'd prefer working in the CLI too. Most times I go the CLI route even if a GUI is available. Not because I am contrarian, but only because I feel more comfortable in doing what I am doing. Man pages and help options explain much more in detail than a tooltip in the GUI ever would.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • ? This user is from outside of this forum
                  Guest
                  last edited by

                  @Inxsible:

                  @bingo600:

                  @TS_b:

                  A CLI is probably not particularly useful for a home network.

                  What does a CLI have to do with home networking ?
                  I'd prefer a CLI anytime, but that's a user preference , not where it's used.

                  But the learningcurve for using the CLI could be challenging for some.

                  /Bingo

                  Cha ching !!

                  I'd prefer working in the CLI too. Most times I go the CLI route even if a GUI is available. Not because I am contrarian, but only because I feel more comfortable in doing what I am doing. Man pages and help options explain much more in detail than a tooltip in the GUI ever would.

                  On top of that, the 'interface' doesn't hide as much on the command line as text has to be either there or not there, it isn't graphically styled in some ambiguous way leaving it up to the user to figure out what it's supposed to do.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • T Offline
                    TS_b Banned
                    last edited by

                    Sorry, let me correct my statement.

                    I was speaking from the point of view of your average home users who does not already know a switch CLI particularly well.
                    But I didn't specify that at all.

                    For someone who doesn't already know it probably isn't useful for a home because they will likely spend 20-30 minutes setting it up on a GUI once then never or rarely touch it again.

                    CLI would be very valuable and worth learning even for the uninitiated if you had even a small to medium network compromising a number of switches where you would be spending a notable amount of time managing them.
                    In that case it would be miserable to repeatedly make changes via the GUI.

                    I do agree that for anyone who is already comfortable with switching CLI, it's a very valuable feature.

                    The zyxel I recommended earlier operates primarily off web GUI, however there is a CLI you can access via either telnet or ssh (don't remember which) and a console header you can utilize if you're so inclined.
                    I think it strikes a very attractive balance commercial and home user.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • ? This user is from outside of this forum
                      Guest
                      last edited by

                      For a new basic managed switch for home use, the ZyXel works fine indeed. But if you want to go bigger, used HP switches (or new) are a fine choice.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • B Offline
                        Billyboy
                        last edited by

                        I am searching for a cheap stackable switch for the WAN Side.
                        I have a HA CARP Setup with Multiwan (through AVM Fritzbox Routers).

                        Any suggestions?

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • DerelictD Offline
                          Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
                          last edited by

                          Are cheap and stackable the only requirements?

                          (Note that those terms are usually mutually-exclusive. You might also need to define the term cheap)

                          Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
                          A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
                          DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
                          Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • jahonixJ Offline
                            jahonix
                            last edited by

                            This discussion has gone far from the topic starter's question, hasn't it?

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • DerelictD Offline
                              Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
                              last edited by

                              They always morph into "what should I do instead.?"

                              Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
                              A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
                              DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
                              Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • B Offline
                                Billyboy
                                last edited by

                                I need it on the WAN side to connect 3 VDSL Router. The existing VDSL Router have built in switches, actually directly connected to a Firebox, but it seems like they are causing trouble with the CARP failover. So, VLAN and spanning Tree, configurable ARP timer would be good. Did I forgot something? Do I need anything for CARP/VRRP support?

                                @Derelict:

                                Are cheap and stackable the only requirements?

                                (Note that those terms are usually mutually-exclusive. You might also need to define the term cheap)

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • ? This user is from outside of this forum
                                  Guest
                                  last edited by

                                  I think getting a bridged modem is a better option. CARP/VRRP is problematic if it happens too often since most providers do MAC throttling to prevent draining the lease pool too quickly.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • DerelictD Offline
                                    Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
                                    last edited by

                                    CARP on WAN generally does not play nice with residential-type WAN connections.

                                    You need a static /29 there. You can usually get away with a static /32 on the secondary WAN but it is sub-optimal.

                                    Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
                                    A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
                                    DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
                                    Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • B Offline
                                      Billyboy
                                      last edited by

                                      @johnkeates:

                                      I think getting a bridged modem is a better option. CARP/VRRP is problematic if it happens too often since most providers do MAC throttling to prevent draining the lease pool too quickly.

                                      A CARP failover happens very seldom, maybe once a month, but it has to work.
                                      What do you mean with bridged modem? PPPoE? Does this play with CARP?
                                      Actually, I am using a private IP net only as transfer net between the PFSense und the router, doing double NAT (in the PFSense as well as in the router) . No, I am not using SIP ;-)
                                      Would probably a OpenWRT routers (without an extra switch) work better, as far as I know, you can configure ARP timeout with OpenWRT?

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • B Offline
                                        Billyboy
                                        last edited by

                                        @Derelict:

                                        CARP on WAN generally does not play nice with residential-type WAN connections.

                                        You need a static /29 there. You can usually get away with a static /32 on the secondary WAN but it is sub-optimal.

                                        I know that´s sub optimal, but that is the use case. We are replacing expensive company Internet lines with low cost residential VDSL lines, plus adding additional HA with LTE lines (LTE is not available together with public IP in Germany).

                                        So I am doing double NAT, with a private IP net between pfsense and the router. Shouldn't that work, it is pretty much the same as on the LAN side?

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • DerelictD Offline
                                          Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
                                          last edited by

                                          Yes. If you want to do double NAT and put a bunch of potential points of failure in front of the firewalls it will work fine.

                                          As long as both primary and secondary can access the internet while the CARP VIPs are in the BACKUP state it should work.

                                          Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
                                          A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
                                          DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
                                          Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • ? This user is from outside of this forum
                                            Guest
                                            last edited by

                                            @nktech1135:

                                            Hello all.
                                            I'm not sure how practical this is. I am looking for a managed switch for vlans and such and was wondering if pfsense could do this? I'm already using pfsense in a routing capasity but baught a prebuilt hardware solution for that. This time i'd like to build my own.
                                            The questions i have are this.
                                            1, is it a practical use of pfsense to use it as a managed switch OS?
                                            2, if so, what would you guys recommend for an 8 port box? It should be future proofed for updates and be under $200 if possible.
                                            The switch will be on the lan side so should have full gigabit speeds.

                                            Thoughts?

                                            At first get a switch that owns 8 GB LAN Ports! And if you need Layer3 Routing, VLANs, LAGs (LACP)
                                            CLI and a real serial console port get a Cisco SG300-10 or Cisco SG350-10. They are often able to
                                            get at amazon.com for ~$110 (SG300-10) or ~$200 (SG350-10) if more ports and other things such
                                            SFP/SFP+ Ports or 10 GBit/s abillity is another point you will be fine with a  D-Link DGS1510-20 for
                                            around ~$270 but with much more power and ports. They are also other solutions out!

                                            Netgear Layer2
                                            Netgear GS108E
                                            Netgear GS108Tv2
                                            Netgear GS110T

                                            Cisco Layer2 & Layer3
                                            Cisco SG200-08
                                            Cisco SG300-10
                                            Cisco SG350-10

                                            Layer3 more ports
                                            D-link DGS1510-20

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