Messages

I'm just setting up OPNSense for the first time. I figured why not, I need to get away from PfSense, so why not start migrating slowly. A friend of mine needed his firewall setup (long story short), so I figured why not use him as a guine pig, plus PfS***e is getting a bit buggy. I've had interface and Unbound issues.
Anyhow, I just noticed the CPU, being a i7-6700 is showing as a 8 core CPU with 4 threads. This seems backwards. Shouldn't it be 4 core 8 threads?
That is what Intel lists it as...
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/88196/intel-core-i76700-processor-8m-cache-up-to-4-00-ghz/specifications.html

@ pmhausen OK, understood and yes, I understand and agree on the hardware, however there are times when a client doesn't have the money or needs a quick fix and if I can avoid violating an agreement I will do so.
However if I can get the builder some extra support I will also do so as they have bills to pay too.

@bimbar That is my thought too. Business and stability are a must even if they are behind a bit, but there are those few times when they may need a cutting edge kernel to get some new hardware working.

OK, thank you for the clarification guys. You'll be seeing me around more though I'm not super active, I just have to many irons in the fire and not enough time to do everything I want and/or need to do.

I agree with dumbo, What would you use?
You say Ubiquiti equipment is expensive but a typical layer 3 Ubiquiti switch is about $1,000 and a comparible Cisco switch is about $2,000.

OK, so if I understand correctly, it is free to use for whatever scenario (Just like PfSense was in the beginning) and just like most open source projects BUT the project needs to be supported, so if used for commercial purposed PLEASE support the project.
Besides, at $360 or so for business every 3 years is pretty dang affordable!
I only ask because with PfSense going the direction it is (and due to the things they have done to their competitors) I'm considering migrating my clients over gradually.
I plan to bench test as soon as I am able but OPNSense needs to be as or more stable than PfSense and as quiet as this forum is I suspect that will likely be the case.

I know PfSense's stance on using the CE edition for commercial use but what is OPNSense's stance on using your own hardware and OPNSense OS for commercial use?

Check your firewall logs from whatever ip address your TV is assigned to see if any of the ports or protocols are being blocked.

Ever get this figured out?

Well it was a thought, and mind you I wasn't thinking there would be full integration, maybe even a read only integration, I don't really know as it was strictly speculation regarding a idea as both Netgate and OpnSense (to my knowledge) have remote management issues. Now while remote management is also a feature, it is also a vulnerability just as every added feature to any forward facing device is. The trick is to weigh the benefit vs risk and while for some the benefit may be worth the risk, for other it is not.
Either way, it is what it is, just a thought, an idea to maybe spark a thought and/or a idea in someone else with the skills to do such tasks.

I had a idea that could potentially draw more attention to OpnSense, or really any company that produces a router that would compete with other routers out there.

It has been my experience in the past few years that the Unifi (or even Edge) routers produced by Ubiquiti simply are inadequate. They are under powered and in some cases over priced. Over time they continue to get slower which requires the administrative staff to buy replacements to keep the network speed functioning at 100% of it's capability.

So, in short here's my thoughts....

Ubquiti equipment is getting pretty popular (at least here in the states) and OpnSense is building a reputation for having the most up to date router, why not add to that a package which would allow a OpnSense router take commands from a Ubiquiti controller? Obviously not all the commands but enough to allow it to integrate with a Ubiquiti network to some degree?
This would allow for some kind of remote management and monitoring with integration with other highly used network equipment.

Anyhow, what are your thoughts? Obviously I don't think it should be part of the core of the system, though I suppose it could be as a option that is turned on but I think it could give you guys another edge on the competition.

Heck this model could be used with other network equipment out there too.
Some kind of base integration allowing the OpnSense router to in some way communicate with the already established equipment there by making it easier to manage, deploy and monitor.

It's a thought! What do you think?

I'm new here so take what I say with a grain of salt but to my knowledge it is not possible to do a failover group with VPN but you could have two VPN connections set in your VPN application, one for the primary connection and the other for the secondary (failover).
If the first doesn't connect then try the next.

The other problem you may run into is unless you have a static IP on both you will likely need to use something like Dynamic DNS to resolve the new IP that your internet connections have received.

Hopefully that helps somewhat.