@johnpoz

The switch = Cisco WS-C3560E-48PD-SF. Also running a 2960-CG

Re: There is really no reason for it
I am well aware that what I'm doing falls in the realm of completely unnecessary for a home network. Just a learning exercise.

I figured out the answer to my convoluted post from yesterday. You touched on it in your post but I'll type it out in my words...

From what I can tell, the pfSense LAN is the only untagged network available on the router. Changing the native VLAN on a switch, for example, to VLAN 20, would require that the ip address assigned to that VLAN be in the address range of the LAN network on the pfSense box (because it also is untagged) to maintain web access to the switch.

Key takeaway - the native VLAN on switch (untagged) should not be assigned to a VLAN network (tagged) on a pfSense box (else one loses web access to the switch). Also, the ip address assigned to native VLAN on switch must be in the same subnet as the router LAN.

Thank you. -jeff

@xyzzyz said in VLAN question for noob moving from Cisco ASA:

My question: On my pfSense replacement for the ASA, is there any advantage to setting up a VLAN for the WAN port?

No.

@derelict did a Google search for netgear dual wan and one of the links was to this forum))) It crossed my mind that it's probably a wrong place to ask for help with my issue but I decided to give it a go anyways)