• Hey guys,

    I recently bought a pfsense firewall from http://store.netgate.com/Netgate-m1n1wall-2D3-2D13-Red-P218C83.aspx. I used to use a Airport Extreme as my primary router, but have since switched it over to bridge mode.

    The APX worked great, especially with all the Apple devices I have on the network.

    My question is, would you guys advise that i stick with using the negate to assign IPs and handle NAT or is the Airport Extreme (2013) better for this kind of thing?

  • honestly I don't think it matters. As soon as you need to use the "advanced features" in pfsense, then it would make sense to disable the routing on the airport and use this as the router. But at the end of the day a sickass Juniper $10,000 firewall and a $20 TPlink are the same thing when you have them serving a barbershop. Their test of strength only shows up when you crank up the heat.

  • Well said. Thank you for your response.

    The reason I got pfsense was because I can't help but tinker with stuff and the Airport is locked down tight, probably for good reason. It definitely is a plug it in and forget it kind of device.

    One legitimate reason I started routing with pfsense is because I work from home and require a stable l2tp VPN connection to my employers network. About 2 or 3 times a day it will randomly disconnect. My modem has healthy levels and doesn't seem to be incurring packet loss. Thus, I am wondering if something like pfsense will resolve that issue.

    Any thoughts or suggestions?

  • the vpn server is at work, right? not at home? if the server is not running from home I don't think the router makes a difference. If you are running a Windows shop, I might suggest you look into DirectAccess.