Plus VS CE current differences??
-
All the documentation I can find is not very recent. Things move on, so we've found out.
Does anyone have an up-to-date list (or a link to) of what all the differences are between Plus vs CE ??
Even Netgate's official documentation is ridiculously old.
You'd think if there were going to change the license terms forcing many to downgrade that they could at least get their own doco. updated so people can make an informed choice - and by choice I mean whether to use CE or another product - not everyone can afford the $129US/year at this point in time.
-
Having an official table on their site would be a good start
https://www.reddit.com/r/Netgate/comments/17jv3wi/coming_soon_netgate_pfsense_plus_tac_lite/k75evnh/
Shouldnt have to go to reddit to find this
-
@pfsenseuser1 said in Plus VS CE current differences??:
Having an official table on their site would be a good start
Yeah, spot on.
Thanks for the link - the list is larger than I was expecting - and I think there's a few others missing as well. I recall something about MAC filtering (although I don't know if that's the "deny unknown clients" in the DHCP server or something else).
I'm sure there's a few more but the gap is only going to get wider between the two, so it might be time to move.
-
Yup we are working on something now to clarify that. Should be available in a few days.
-
I hope some, maybe less important features like MAC-Filter, will trickle down to the CE at a later date...
-
I hope they push ZFS more by including boot environments on CE. Then put the non-ZFS option to the sword and move on!
Not sure why they placed QAT or IPsec-MB Crypto behind the pfSense+ wall either. Not many have the hardware but for those that do they should be utilised to the max. Energy saving does matter.
Equally there are many things included in CE that probably would deserve a pfSense+ wrapper but through contribution history cannot be isolated in retrospect.
️ -
@RobbieTT said in Plus VS CE current differences??:
Not sure why they placed QAT or IPsec-MB Crypto behind the pfSense+ wall either.
Isn't IPsec-MB developed by Intel and already ported to FreeBSD?
-
@RobbieTT said in Plus VS CE current differences??:
I hope they push ZFS more by including boot environments on CE. Then put the non-ZFS option to the sword and move on!
Not sure why they placed QAT or IPsec-MB Crypto behind the pfSense+ wall either. Not many have the hardware but for those that do they should be utilised to the max. Energy saving does matter.
Equally there are many things included in CE that probably would deserve a pfSense+ wrapper but through contribution history cannot be isolated in retrospect.
️The only reservation i have with any proposal to scrap UFS is when using ZFS with VM's, it will guarantee any sparse/thin created VM instance to the full size in short time. This is inherent with CoW filesystems and why UFS is still key for virtual setups.
Pops
-
@Popolou
Tryb runningzpool trim pfSenseI run it from time to time and it gives back your free place. But your VM has to be set properly. Said trim will work on proxmox (I use it) only if your pfSense disk has "discard" set (I hope I remember it correctly - I am away from device and writing from memory)
