Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

pfSense 2.4 Release Candidate Now Available

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • pfSense 2.4 Release Candidate Now Available

    Phoronix: pfSense 2.4 Release Candidate Now Available

    Version 2.4 of the pfSense BSD-based firewall/router operating system is nearing and the release candidate is out this week for testing...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...fSense-2.4-RC1

  • #2
    Nice, been testing pfsense 2.1 a while ago as a replacement of a OpenWRT on TP-Link router. I didn't go through with it at the time, but now I am setting up a new config based on pfsense 2.4 beta in combination with airVPN. Still in Virtualbox for now but I have a Zotac CI323 on order which I expect this week. I will install with pfsense 2.4. I don't expect the internal zotac wifi will be supported and even if it is, not very useful as an AP. I'll probably get a separate AP for wifi.

    I would love to see you do a comparison. If you do, please pay special mind to the AES encryption for VPN connections and alike. The Zotac box above has dual gigabit ethernet, quad core and hardware encryption support, as most CPU's do these days but the 3150 is particularly cheap and more than decent as a router box.

    Comment


    • #3
      I'm currently running pfSense 2.4 and comparison would be nice indeed!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by nazar-pc View Post
        I'm currently running pfSense 2.4 and comparison would be nice indeed!
        I recommend you try opnsense.
        It's forked form opnsense but with a much more open ideology.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by nomadewolf View Post

          I recommend you try opnsense.
          It's forked form opnsense but with a much more open ideology.
          I tried it and got stuck on the setup, the default password they provide didn't work. pfSense on the other hand worked like a charm. Too bad it didn't recognized my WiFi USB card.

          But pfSense elimination of nano installs is bad news for me, since I don't want a disc install for my AMD64 router.

          Comment


          • #6
            i'd very much like to see a comparison, i work with this stuff everyday but i found pfsense the only viable solution- and i spent a month trying to find alternatives.

            Comment


            • #7
              Well thanks to now only working on 64bit I need to throw out my old server that I have been running pfsense on for years. That may not be such a problem since I sometimes have access to old hardware that is thrown away ,what really worries me is the AES-NI requirement for the CPU when you move on to pfSense 2.5. OPNsense might be a viable option , but there is a lot of crap being thrown in both directions. It is not easy to figure out what is the truth or not, but it seems that the OPNsense guys are a bit too aggressive in promoting their version so I better stay with what I am used to ...for now.

              Comment


              • #8
                I manage a firewall using a standard Debian (currently version 8) distro. On top of that it is a virtual machine (that make rebooting very fast, for example, also I can take snapshot before a system upgrade and so on). That firewall is serving over 18.000 users with only a couple issues in many years (I just encountered a couple of buggy Debian kernels which had some problems). I find it quite easy to manage it, I only need to edit the interfaces file, manage a custom script for running my iptables rules, and tuning of sysctl.conf to manage more mac addresses and connection trackings. Also very useful NFLOG for saving matching of external connection info (remote IP and external firewall public IP) with the matching internal private IP. Just my experience.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by nomadewolf View Post
                  It's forked form opnsense but with a much more open ideology.
                  +1 I'd also like to see a comparison including OPNsense, particularly on older hardware with Realtek ethernet, since repurposing PC's for this application is common. I've been running the 2.4.0 beta for a long time; now on -rc. Been wanting to switch to OPNsense and test their Realtek improvements, but haven't had any problems.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by jwh7 View Post
                    +1 I'd also like to see a comparison including OPNsense, particularly on older hardware with Realtek ethernet, since repurposing PC's for this application is common. I've been running the 2.4.0 beta for a long time; now on -rc. Been wanting to switch to OPNsense and test their Realtek improvements, but haven't had any problems.
                    Honestly, combination of "older hardware" and "Realtek" makes one crappy combo. There is a good reason why majority go with Intel NICs. Drivers and hardware are just better.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X