Recent posts

#1

General Discussion / Re: nfSensei ( fork pfsense )

Last post by patient0 - Today at 07:37:13 AM

At what network size and data throughput does this become relevant?

VPP is a very fast and efficient packet processor and would allow to reach 10Gbit throughput on small, fanless devices.
E.g. the DEC740 can't do 10Gbit with OPNsense (it does 5-6 Gbit) and if the NICs were supported (which they are not) I could saturate my line.

Having said that: VPP seems best suited for routing, since it only supports ACLs (but they seem to be able to do firewall-ish rules).

Two articles about VPP on FreeBSD from Pim van Pelt (who used to run the SIxXS tunnel service with Jeroen Massar) for the interested:

https://ipng.ch/s/articles/2024/02/10/vpp-on-freebsd-part-1/
https://ipng.ch/s/articles/2024/02/10/vpp-on-freebsd-part-2/

He does work and develop for/with VPP (on Debian) and has got a lot of interesting articles about it, in a routing context.

#2

General Discussion / Re: Sonicwall TZ300 compatibil...

Last post by patient0 - Today at 07:21:33 AM

Searching the internet for "Sonicwall TZ300 cpu specs" returns https://www.reddit.com/r/sonicwall/comments/m6aemk/ram_and_cpu_specs_of_tz_models/.

It lists a few Sonicwall models, the TZ300 is one of them but there seem to be multiple generation.

TZ 300 1GB Ram 1.6GHz (2x 800MHz Mips64 Octeon Processor)

If correct, Mips64 would be a show stopper in any case.

#3

Hardware and Performance / Re: AX88179B USB NIC: 57 -> 97...

Last post by web - Today at 05:44:32 AM

thanks! yeah thats what made me go looking, the numbers just didnt add up for a superspeed link. hope it helps someone else with one of these!!

#4

General Discussion / Re: Allow Public Internet IPv4...

Last post by passeri - Today at 03:48:20 AM

Interestingly, the sentence starting "However" in the second paragraph said all that was necessary as an opening and probably sufficient question.

Given it looks like a question to or by AI, I decided to give just the critical sentence (with contextual "In OPNsense") to a local model (Qwen3.6 35B A3B in this case). After thinking strenuously for 1.2s (a minute elapsed) it came up with a lengthy explanation and correct answer, together with validation tests and informative notes for beginners.

That is not how I do OPNsense myself, but it seems that simple clear questions work either way.

#5

26.7 Series / Re: Internal DNS only works fo...

Last post by rheilke - Today at 01:24:49 AM

tangofan: thanks for the note about mDNS and TrueNAS. I'll check what QNap does.

Haven't seen XKCD in ages...

#6

General Discussion / Re: Sonicwall TZ300 compatibil...

Last post by HiddenJoker - Today at 01:04:15 AM

Sounds like it wouldn't be worth trying to make something out of it... well at least i asked. But if there would be something to test out in the future then i would like to try it out. I got it for free so i don't really care if it would get bricked or something :)

#7

Q-Feeds (Threat intelligence) / Re: Help fixing 'erroneous' Q-...

Last post by vk2him - Today at 12:14:10 AM

I searched the qfeeds block file and 43.131.7.8 isn't contained there.

virustotal.com also shows zero reported security issues wirh that ip

Vendors Analysis:
No security vendors flagged this URL as malicious
Final URL:
http://43.131.7.8/
Domain:
43.131.7.8

Look at your logs to see why it's being blocked for you?

#8

General Discussion / Re: nfSensei ( fork pfsense )

Last post by RES217AIII - August 08, 2026, 10:25:57 PM

It will support VPP, and thats something that BSDs dont have.

At what network size and data throughput does this become relevant?

#9

General Discussion / Re: Sonicwall TZ300 compatibil...

Last post by pfry - August 08, 2026, 10:06:17 PM

It would probably be a challenge. I can't find a hardware spec offhand, but 2 or 4 cores at 400, 800, or 1000MHz sounds like an embedded device, most likely ARM32. Ethernet is likely provided by a switch chip. Neither device type is well supported by FreeBSD (or any other general-application OS).

#10

26.7 Series / Re: VLAN devices are on LAN IP...

Last post by tonys - August 08, 2026, 09:51:39 PM

Hopefully this settles your debate over combining tagged and untagged traffic, LOL.

See you again when this goes horribly wrong and you do not even remember what you did to make that possible. We never said it was not feasible, but depending on what you do, there can be lots of problems. This may be influenced by your NIC hardware on OpnSense, and is especially true for Unifi switches, which have all kinds of problems with VLANs. If you want a taste of it, look here.

The current switch software releases of some switch models have a problem separating untagged and tagged LANs during switch startup. Depending on the startup order of your machines, they can get IPv4 from any of your VLANs (since all of them are presented untagged). With 802.1x enabled, you may see all IPv6 prefixes at once on untagged ports.

But, as Patrick often says: You do you, LOL. The advice given in here is free - and you are also free to take it or leave it.

I'm not using a Unifi nor other switch and have no requirement for one in the foreseeable future. My AP is the Unifi Pro 7 wireless (UFO style) on one Protecli port and my entire network is wireless with the sole exception of an internet-facing OpenVPN Access Server which is on its own dedicated Protecli port.