[pfSense] Port mapping like reverse proxy

2016-05-10 Thread FrancisM
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

Re: [pfSense] Aggregated WAN traffic

2016-05-10 Thread FrancisM
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 >

Re: [pfSense] 2.2.6 HA to 2.3 Upgrade Advice

2016-05-10 Thread Steve Yates
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

Re: [pfSense] Routing Issue

2016-05-10 Thread Steve Yates
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

[pfSense] Routing Question

2016-05-10 Thread Daniel Eschner
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

[pfSense] 2.2.6 HA to 2.3 Upgrade Advice

2016-05-10 Thread Mike Montgomery
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

Re: [pfSense] Aggregated WAN traffic

2016-05-10 Thread ED Fochler
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

Re: [pfSense] Routing Issue

2016-05-10 Thread Daniel Eschner
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)

Re: [pfSense] Routing Issue

2016-05-10 Thread Daniel Eschner
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

Re: [pfSense] Routing Issue

2016-05-10 Thread Steve Yates
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

[pfSense] Routing Issue

2016-05-10 Thread Daniel Eschner
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

Re: [pfSense] Aggregated WAN traffic

2016-05-10 Thread Bryan D.
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.

Re: [pfSense] Aggregated WAN traffic

2016-05-10 Thread WebDawg
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 >>

Re: [pfSense] Aggregated WAN traffic

2016-05-10 Thread WebDawg
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

Re: [pfSense] Aggregated WAN traffic

2016-05-10 Thread FrancisM
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

Re: [pfSense] Aggregated WAN traffic

2016-05-10 Thread Juan Bernhard
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

Re: [pfSense] Aggregated WAN traffic

2016-05-10 Thread Vick Khera
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,

Re: [pfSense] Aggregated WAN traffic

2016-05-10 Thread Randy Morgan
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

[pfSense] Aggregated WAN traffic

2016-05-10 Thread FrancisM
Dear All, Im a fan of pfsense and been using it the old days 14years ago using the CLI script in freeBSD OS. Now Im using the latest release of this web GUI in my home lab network including my home network. I just want to know if I can aggregate two WAN Connection to become one huge uplink?