PfSense with Gigabyte GA-J1900N-D3V

I'm also having the problem (bug?) where the GA-J1900N-D3V will not pull a DHCP address from my modem (AT&T's 2WIRE 3600HGV).

This is not a plain modem, it is a router! Please read what AT&T is writing about by it selfs;
Designed for a home network, the 2wire 3600HGV 4-port router is ideal for delivering….

If anyone tracks down a solution to this problem, I'd love to hear about it. Thanks!

Yo, this would be really easily, you must set up a static IP at the WAN Interface or Port of the pfSense
and this must be a IP address from the entire IP address range from the router, but static and not via
DHCP given from the AT&T router. As an example:
2WIRE 3600HGV:
Network:192.168.1.0/24 (255.255.255.0)
IP Address of the home router: 192.168.1.1/24
DNS 1: ISPs DNS
DNS 2: Google 8.8.8.8
DHCP: off

If the DHCP Server must be on:
DHCP IP Range: 192.168.1.2 - 192.168.1.100

pfSense WAN Port:
IP Address: 192.168.1.250/24 (static)
DNS: 192.168.1.1/24

pfSense Gateway IP:
Network: 192.168.178.1.0/24 (255.255.255.0)
LAN IP Address: 192.168.178.1/24
Gateway IP Address: 192.168.1.250
DNS: 192.168.1.250/24

jdubin

@BlueKobold:

This is not a plain modem, it is a router!

You are quite correct, and if I had a choice in equipment, this would be the last device I'd pick. However, I don't, and switching ISPs is not an option at this time. Still, this Gigabyte board replaces another which was running pfSense and pulling an IP successfully, so I wasn't expecting significantly different behavior – at least not with something so common as obtaining a DHCP lease!

Yo, this would be really easily, you must set up a static IP at the WAN Interface …

I do appreciate you taking the time to post these instructions, but there's a fairly common setup to approximate a bridge mode, and it was working perfectly well for 2+ years with my previous pfSense installs. The designated device behind the router (i.e. the pfSense box) is issued the public IP of the router, via DHCP, and is placed in the DMZ (of sorts). I don't want to derail the thread with the specifics, so here's the bottom line: the "bridge mode" setup worked fine with two previous pfSense boxes, and it works fine with the USB NIC I'm now using instead of re0.

I'm thinking this is either a bug with pfSense, or with the FreeBSD NIC driver. My next step is to capture some packets for inspection to see what's really going on.

themaninspain

I've had this board for 3 months and the experience has not been good.

My ISP provides internet, VOIP and IPTV using VLAN's. Internet access use PPPoE. pfSense would lose the IP address after 3-4 days and the only way to get the connection back was to reboot - a simple disconnect/connect or ifdown ifup didnt' work. Also snort would stop working on the WAN interface.

Finally, I used an old intel desktop gigabit PCI card for the WAN interface and all of the problems disappeared, I have now been running for 1 month with no problems.

So, at least in the case where you need PPPoE I would be wary of using this board.

jdubin

A follow-up to my problem pulling a DHCP address from a 2WIRE 3600HGV (via AT&T's U-Verse): I was trying to spoof a MAC address on the WAN-assigned NIC. That's what prevented the pfSense box from getting an IP via DHCP. Once I removed the forced MAC, DHCP worked as expected. Perhaps a bug in the Realtek driver? FWIW, the ASIX AX88179-based gigabit USB 3.0 adapter worked great (it was my interim solution), able to push at least 30mbps (limited by speed of ISP). It might be worth looking closer at these USB NICs.

burtonmadness

I've had my Gigabyte J1900 running since March and has been rock solid (after the bios update juggling).

Swapping my main switch, creating a couple of new VLAN to segment my christmas lights network, and network down.

Port light on switch not lit, even through PFsense reporting link up. Anyway 4hrs later, also confirmed that the primary NIC on the mobo is not responding. (Resurrected gigabit USB2 NIC) and getting 70-80Mbps from my 105Mbps ISP.

So out of warranty what do I replace it with?

Memory, SSD mini-itx case/psu all okay.

I was thinking one of the n3150 or n3700 braswell's maybe the Zbox-CI323 nano (dual-NIC), or better off just replacing with another J1900?

I'm not needing high performance or ultra-low power, just average average connecting to 110Mbps ISP three home vlans and a couple of openvpn connections

Regards

jdubin

If I was going to do it again, I'd probably go with something that had integrated Intel NICs. I don't know if Realtek NICs are inherently inferior to Intel's, or if it's that the drivers aren't as fully featured or reliable, but it's rare that you hear of folks having issues with Intel NICs. If you're okay w/ Realtek, then perhaps you're also okay with a USB NIC as a permanent solution – as long as the throughput is there. So why not give a USB 3.0 adapter (e.g. ASIX AX88179) a shot? At under $20/ea, it could be a cheap fix.

burtonmadness

Thx.

I think I might get a USB NIC and persevere for 4-6months and see if the braswell's mature.

I'm not needing high performance or ultra-low power, just average average connecting to 110Mbps ISP three home vlans and a couple of openvpn connections

Perhhaps using the follower of the J1900, a little bit less powerful (- 7%) but also using less electric power
6 Watt against 10 Watt.

Ready to go box
Board only

burtonmadness

I had my LAN NIC fail this morning and after a couple of hard cold boots, it recovered.

On a grasp at straws this morning, since I had lost my config in rebuild, i tried the latest 2.3 alpha (yes warnings taken in), and both NICs are now working, so there's something in 2.2.5 that this board doesn't like.. ;-)

oystito

I'm aware that this thread is getting old (but so am I) and people seem to be more happy now than in the start of the thread.. However, I ran into the same kind of problems.. But the only setting that caused problem was trying to boot from USB formatted with the latest pfSende img. Debian works fine. Putting in HDD from old computer with pfSense installed from DVD runs perfectly. So right now I think the only problem is in the pfSense distro.

sensebox

I just ordered this board on recomendations from some other boards, then I find this problem after 4 hours of troubleshooting!

I have the F4 Firmware out of the box, followed all the BIOS settings mentioned in the thread, never really had an trouble installing pfsense 2.2.6.

RE0 DHCP would never work over the WAN. Then switched I switched to RE1 for WAN and bam, instant IP.

So RE1 was working for LAN and WAN, but nothing will work on RE0, DHCP, Fixed, etc for WAN or LAN. I even took a switch, gave the RE0 WAN a fixed PUBLIC IP that is allowed on the, hooked a host to the switch with an IP that is public and could not ping it.

So is my RE0 dead? I made RE0 LAN and nothing could ping it from the switch, no arp, etc.

I have none of the problems mentioned, but this RE0 just not work for WAN DHCP or LAN Fixed IP.

Looking on the mobo they both have the same chipsets.

I have none of the problems mentioned, but this RE0 just not work for WAN DHCP or LAN Fixed IP.

Perhaps there is something in the BIOS to set it up as working in the so called bypass mode?

sensebox

@BlueKobold:

I have none of the problems mentioned, but this RE0 just not work for WAN DHCP or LAN Fixed IP.

Perhaps there is something in the BIOS to set it up as working in the so called bypass mode?

Thanks, I am new to pfsense, what is this bypass mode? Doesnt help that UEFI is all new to me too, all the production systems I deal with are still BIOS based.

To rule out it is the nic, and because I am more of a centos/fedora guy, I booted of a live CD and am able to get an IP on both interfaces fine.

lspci shows them being recognized as the exact same devices on the pci bus. Same revision etc. I looked at the chips on the board, they look the same.

It is almost as if the pfsense is doing something different with RE0 vs RE1.

Also tried the expermental release, no go.

Guess it is time to really go through the BIOS and try things to switch things to legacy mode.

sensebox

Installed untangled last night 100% stable and works, this is frustrating. Works OK, but it is not pfsense.

Any tips to see if the WAN is initialized differently that the LAN? Well really if RE0 is inited differently.

Installed untangled last night 100% stable and works, this is frustrating. Works OK, but it is not pfsense.

The Linux and Windows driver support for hardware are more common then for BSD and Unix systems
but this is not a really secret.

Any tips to see if the WAN is initialized differently that the LAN? Well really if RE0 is inited differently.

Are there any special BIOS settings according to that LAN port?

Power saving
speed increasing
Green Ethernet
bypass mode
settings related to this above named things

sensebox

Thanks Frank for your suggestions, this board unfortunately only has the ability to enable or disable the ports.

So I was able to get it to work, after 2.2.6 and 2.3 beta did not work, I tried 2.2.4 and it worked out of the box. I then installed 2.2.6 again and the first port re0 never works as WAN or LAN still.

So my question is, how do I find out what has changed in the code specifically for the first lan port re0 initialization? Again these are both the same chipset, just different positions on the PCI bus.

I am using the pfsense-memstick-2.2.4-release-amd64.img.gz. I did try 32bit for giggles, but it crashes. Xenserver and CentOS worked beautifully too!

I may at a later point try 2.2.5 to see if that works or broke at that point.

I would like to contribute and find out what it is, and open a bug report.

Thanks!

MikeV7896

I had been running 2.3 on my J1900 board before I finally put it onto my main box… I don't remember if I updated the BIOS to F4 though... it might still be F3. I know I had no problems with both NICs functioning.

I don't have it hooked up at the moment though... if I have the opportunity sometime this week, I'll see what the BIOS settings look like.

I tried 2.2.4 and it worked out of the box. I then installed 2.2.6 again and the first port re0 never works as WAN or LAN still.

It could be based on the driver or the general architecture or pfSense code but this might be only a
guess from me. So I personally would more tend to go with 2.2.4 and wait a bit longer to try it out
from time to time.

sensebox

@BlueKobold:

I tried 2.2.4 and it worked out of the box. I then installed 2.2.6 again and the first port re0 never works as WAN or LAN still.

It could be based on the driver or the general architecture or pfSense code but this might be only a
guess from me. So I personally would more tend to go with 2.2.4 and wait a bit longer to try it out
from time to time.

Thanks, from the sounds of it, there is a good chance this lan chipset won't be supported. So I decided to return the board. Really wanted to make it work, based on the price. and seemed stable when running, but a reboot or a shutdown was a crap shoot on whether it would come back up or not!

So I returned the board (and case) but stuck with the pico psu and 12v brick (Cost of doing business I guess) and ordered this: http://www.amazon.com/Solana-Tech-pfsense-firewall-motherboard/dp/B01DB9JRNC?ie=UTF8&colid=2PRIMO09NOET5&coliid=I1R617T4IQIYBV&ref_=wl_it_dp_o_pC_S_ttl

Twice the price but intel nics, so hoping it works as advertised, since it does say pfsense this time around!

BobbyB

Oh man… I guess I should have done more research before buying this mobo... Am I completely stuck or will this thing ever play nice? I was able to get 2.3 to install, I had to disable UEFI and a turned off usb junk. I was able to boot and install from a DVD+R, I was able to get into the web gui but it seems to get angry with the other nic. I REALLY would like to get this board working, has anyone has any success with this mobo and 2.3 or, should I down-grade to a different working version (can someone provide a link, can't seem to find one). Thanks!