Re: [pfSense] Problem with new Unit

2016-02-19 Thread Jeff H
Just a few things off the top of my head that you've probably already checked (no offense if some are very basic): -Have you verified internal clients are getting the right DNS (if they are getting it via DHCP) -Have you verified the internal DNS server is receiving the client requests? -Have you

Re: [pfSense] openvpn site to site clients not communicating ??

2016-02-19 Thread A Mohan Rao
Pls check rule Wan rule : source lan destination any your VPN port 1194. If still not work go to your interface then uncheck two options. Block... Regards mohan On Feb 19, 2016 3:25 AM, "Richard Lussier" wrote: > Hi, This option is not available on a site to site

Re: [pfSense] PFSense for high-bandwith environments

2016-02-19 Thread David Burgess
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Giles Davis wrote: > > > Using Intel E3-1270s and Intel 10G NICs (forget the exact model, but > they use the BSD ix driver) we start seeing packet loss and a general > maximum throughput at around 1-1.2Gbit. Our 'solution' so far of just >

Re: [pfSense] PFSense for high-bandwith environments

2016-02-19 Thread ED Fochler
Don’t assume that this is upper bound, but I get 800 MB/s on my Myricom card and 600MB/s on my chelsio card, both on standard ethernet frame size, so dominantly 1500 byte packets. I’m using these for data transfer, so I’m measuring in MB not Mb. The switch you’re connecting to also matters.

Re: [pfSense] PFSense for high-bandwith environments

2016-02-19 Thread Giles Davis
On 19/02/2016 16:19, ED Fochler wrote: > My experience has been that intel nics are bad in the 10G space, especially > under BSD. I’ve had good luck with Myricom and Chelsio on BSD, though I > haven’t used either specifically on PFSense. > > >> >> Also, AFAIK, chelsio NICs are better in the 10G

Re: [pfSense] PFSense for high-bandwith environments

2016-02-19 Thread ED Fochler
My experience has been that intel nics are bad in the 10G space, especially under BSD. I’ve had good luck with Myricom and Chelsio on BSD, though I haven’t used either specifically on PFSense. > On 2016, Feb 18, at 1:29 PM, Rainer Duffner wrote: > > >> Am 18.02.2016

Re: [pfSense] Problem with new Unit

2016-02-19 Thread David Ross
No. Split DNS. Internal is basically a cache plus has the IP settings for internal LAN addresses. David Ross > On Feb 19, 2016, at 10:50 AM, WebDawg wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:30 PM, David Ross >> wrote: >> Current device is an

Re: [pfSense] recover vnstat data

2016-02-19 Thread WebDawg
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote: > Hi, > > I just installed a new pfsense here as a test, it worked well so far, so now > I would like to take there the vnstat database files. I can't write them, the > fs os RO. I would not like to open the case

Re: [pfSense] Problem with new Unit

2016-02-19 Thread WebDawg
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:30 PM, David Ross wrote: > Current device is an xxx running pfSense 2.0.1-RELEASE > > New device is an SG-2440 running pfSense 2.2.6-RELEASE > > I decided that trying to reload the configuration file with that big of a > gap in versions was