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

    Interface addition - is this a bug?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    17 Posts 6 Posters 1.4k Views 5 Watching
    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.
    • P Offline
      Pentangle @viragomann
      last edited by

      @viragomann Yes, VMXNET3, like the others are. I've since noticed that actually ALL my interface assignments aside from the LAN were screwed and needed re-setting.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • V Offline
        viragomann
        last edited by

        pfSense generally adds the devices in the order of the hardware bus and device numbers, which is given by the host:

        ce212287-605f-4ff0-a39f-17d44699ca64-grafik.png

        So maybe ESXi gives the new device a number less than an already existing.
        Possibly there is a way to change it in ESXi.

        P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • P Offline
          Pentangle @viragomann
          last edited by

          @viragomann in which case then wouldn't it be more desirable to add the existing devices based on MAC address and then add new devices afterwards in whatever order they see fit? i.e. i'd view it as a bug that adding a new NIC breaks old NIC assignments. Wouldn't you?

          V 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • V Offline
            viragomann @Pentangle
            last edited by

            @Pentangle said in Interface addition - is this a bug?:

            in which case then wouldn't it be more desirable to add the existing devices based on MAC address

            The MAC address of a NIC is primarily a property which connected devices can see and take account of if necessary. E.g. for MAC filtering.

            @Pentangle said in Interface addition - is this a bug?:

            i'd view it as a bug that adding a new NIC breaks old NIC assignments.

            Possilby in ESXi.

            In KVM I can manually set the hardware bus numbers if needed, but I don't know how to do in ESXi.

            P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • H Offline
              heper
              last edited by

              @viragomann said in Interface addition - is this a bug?:

              be ESXi gives the new device a number less than an already existing.
              Possibly there is a way to change it in ESXi.

              https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198406

              V 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • V Offline
                viragomann @heper
                last edited by

                @heper
                That concerns to VLAN and FreeBSD 10.1. The TO didn't mention the use of VLANs.

                Besides, that bug should be fixed long ago I think, isn't it?

                P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • P Offline
                  Pentangle @viragomann
                  last edited by

                  @viragomann I don't know either!

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • H Offline
                    heper
                    last edited by heper

                    it's not a bsd bug, it's an esxi thing ... it appears to still be relevant. the bug is indeed related to vlans, but the issue of the reordering is addressed aswell

                    esxi has been reordering interfaces after >4 Vnics of the same type, for as long as i can remember. that's one of the reasons i prefer to let the VM handle the vlans and not the host.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • P Offline
                      Pentangle @viragomann
                      last edited by

                      @viragomann I've actually got VLANs configured on one of the NICs from a previous network arrangement but i'm not using them.

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

                        It's just how ESXI probes NICs.

                        <4 is: 1,2,3,4
                        If you have 8, it becomes: 1,5,2,6,3,7,4,8

                        Check the MACs, reassign the networks and/or interfaces to match what you want in pfSense.

                        Remember: Upvote with the šŸ‘ 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!

                        P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • P Offline
                          Pentangle @jimp
                          last edited by

                          @jimp Can't you do something cleverer then? It was just blind luck that my LAN assignment was NIC1 otherwise i'd have lost access.

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

                            Not without a ton of work to try to make NICs persist or be matched by their original hardware address. Gets tricky fast. There is a feature request out there for that, but in practice it's a rare need.

                            Remember: Upvote with the šŸ‘ 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!

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

                              @jimp said in Interface addition - is this a bug?:

                              Not without a ton of work to try to make NICs persist or be matched by their original hardware address. Gets tricky fast. There is a feature request out there for that, but in practice it's a rare need.

                              On a regular (non VM) pfSense maching i'd hate Mac-mapped nics.
                              Would make "cloning" a config to a new machine "ugly"

                              /Bingo

                              If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "thumbs up"

                              pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

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

                              P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • P Offline
                                Pentangle @bingo600
                                last edited by

                                @bingo600 I'm not advocating that as the only method, just a small table lookup for existing MAC addresses with a failover to the current way of working if not in the table. A clone would therefore work as before since none of the MAC addresses would exist.

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