Is there any plugins from pfsense to do this kind of configuration just
like reverse proxy. this is the scenario. I only have 1 public IP address
Im able to do the port 80 and 443 to pass it to the server behind me using
the reverse proxy however I want to do the same in other ports and below is
th
On Wednesday, 11 May 2016, ED Fochler wrote:
> Unless your ISP is involved, you’re not going to do link aggregation or
> BGP. I’m guessing you’re doing NAT on both of these WAN connections, and
> not just routing. In this case I would recommend separating traffic by
> user, or by port/protocol.
https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Upgrade_Guide#Upgrading_High_Availability_Deployments
"Generally the recommended path for upgrading a High Availability cluster is to
first upgrade the secondary node."
--
Steve Yates
ITS, Inc.
-Original Message-
From: List [mailto:list-boun...@lists.p
You should not have to route anything manually. Your data center or ISP routes
the /25 to 212.168.31.130. In essence, packets are sent there for you.
PfSense then "knows" the LAN side is the /25 and sends them to the LAN.
--
Steve Yates
ITS, Inc.
-Original Message-
From: List [mailt
Hi there,
can anyone tell me how is it possible to route a Public Network thought a
Transfer-Network?
When i create a (Gateway rule) i get errors :-(
I dont want to use NAT or somethink like that.
___
pfSense mailing list
https://lists.pfsense.org/mail
I have two servers, setup in high availability that are currently running
2.2.6. I have been running 2.3 at home and my test servers and am ready to
upgrade the office to 2.3 as well. I have been reading several upgrade
guides, as to which one to upgrade first, but would like to see if anyone
has
Unless your ISP is involved, you’re not going to do link aggregation or BGP.
I’m guessing you’re doing NAT on both of these WAN connections, and not just
routing. In this case I would recommend separating traffic by user, or by
port/protocol.
I had a DSL and T1 arrangement a while ago and f
When i delete the Route everything works fine but the /25 is handled that as a
Privat Network:
traceroute -i igb1 web.de
traceroute: Warning: web.de has multiple addresses; using 82.165.229.138
traceroute to web.de (82.165.229.138), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 lee.de (212.168.31.129) 0.442
Let my try to explain it completely ;)
i configured something like that in my first Router.
I think CARP etc. is not the problem here:
WAN (wan) -> igb0 -> v4: 212.168.31.131/29
FCSE_PUB (lan) -> igb1 -> v4: 212.168.31.2/25
HA_SYNC (opt1) -> igb3 -> v4: 10.0.0.1/24
The
I'm a bit confused whether the /25 is your LAN subnet or another interface.
The OpenVPN tunnel network has to be a subnet that is on no other interfaces
including the remote PC's LAN. For example we have our data center using a /29
for WAN, a /25 for LAN, 10.20.1.0/24 for PFSYNC, and 192.168.1
Hi there,
i try to configure 2 PFsense Firewalls as the Following Setup:
My ISP gave me a /29 ans Transfer-Network. I Setup the IPS as the following:
x.x.x.131/29 PF1
x.x.x.132/29 PF2
x.x.x.130/130 CARP Interface (Redundant)
After that i added x.x.x.2/25 and to another interface and created als
On 2016-May-10, at 10:14 AM, WebDawg wrote:
> Usually the only thing that you
> can do in this situation is put your connection at its lowest setting
> and control the connection from there. The problem with this is that
> the connection will always be this lowest speed.
FWIW, our connection is
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 12:14 PM, WebDawg wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 9:29 AM, FrancisM wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 10 May 2016, Vick Khera wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Randy Morgan >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> > Having said that there is some question in my mind as to how this
>>> actua
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 9:29 AM, FrancisM wrote:
> On Tuesday, 10 May 2016, Vick Khera wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Randy Morgan > > wrote:
>>
>> > Having said that there is some question in my mind as to how this
>> actually
>> > works. Some of what I read indicates that the agg
On Tuesday, 10 May 2016, Vick Khera wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Randy Morgan > wrote:
>
> > Having said that there is some question in my mind as to how this
> actually
> > works. Some of what I read indicates that the aggregation actually
> causes
> > the LAGG port to, effectivel
El 10/05/2016 a las 10:58 a.m., Vick Khera escribió:
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Randy Morgan wrote:
Having said that there is some question in my mind as to how this actually
works. Some of what I read indicates that the aggregation actually causes
the LAGG port to, effectively, operat
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Randy Morgan wrote:
> Having said that there is some question in my mind as to how this actually
> works. Some of what I read indicates that the aggregation actually causes
> the LAGG port to, effectively, operate on QOS functionality, meaning that
> it cycles be
Unless I have miss read the documentation, the short answer is yes you
can. This setup is done under LAGG. Here you can combine multiple
ports with different configurations, one of them is port aggregation.
If the aggregation works like it does on other routers and switches then
this should
18 matches
Mail list logo
