Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PFSense Firewall Group purchase interest

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

    #16
    Originally posted by langenet View Post
    I'd be interested. The only issue as of today is that I have no idea on installing/running/setting up PFSense. So if you could pre-write PFSense that would help immensely.
    Currently I'm looking at the SG-1000 only because it's pre-installed/configured etc. I'm sure I could get there (install/setup) but have yet ventured there.
    Like you, I'm looking for the smallest footprint...and lowest power consumption.

    I did certify as a Cisco CCNP years ago so am not totally blind with any of this.

    Robert
    Check the online reviews for the SG-1000. If you have larger Internet "pipe" and heavy traffic (ie movies, etc) it's probably not a good choice.

    Z

    Comment


      #17
      Pete,

      Count me in.

      As far as the gold support made available on other models, I'm confident the collective knowledge and wisdom of this community will be more than sufficient.

      Robert

      Comment


        #18
        Thank you logbuilder...I have added you name to the list in the OP.

        Reminded just now via a PM that the J1900 won't support V2.5 because of AES-N probably giving this product only a lifespan a few years out....

        Let's do a what if scenario thinking about the future some and keeping the size of the 4 port firewall nanoITX sized, low powered et al....

        The SG-1000 was mentioned above...it uses an Arm CPU...

        I have not really looked for multiple NIC ARM based devices.

        I am playing though with 64 bit Ubuntu on the Pine64 2 Gb machine with only one NIC.
        - Pete

        Auto mator
        Homeseer 3 Pro - 3.0.0.548 (Linux) - Ubuntu 18.04/W7e 64 bit Intel Haswell CPU 16Gb
        Homeseer Zee2 (Lite) - 3.0.0.548 (Linux) - Ubuntu 18.04/W7e - CherryTrail x5-Z8350 BeeLink 4Gb BT3 Pro
        HS4 Lite - Ubuntu 22.04 / Lenovo Tiny M900 / 32Gb Ram

        HS4 Pro - V4.1.18.1 - Ubuntu 22.04 / Lenova Tiny M900 / 32Gb Ram
        HSTouch on Intel tabletop tablets (Jogglers) - Asus AIO - Windows 11

        X10, UPB, Zigbee, ZWave and Wifi MQTT automation-Tasmota-Espurna. OmniPro 2, Russound zoned audio, Alexa, Cheaper RFID, W800 and Home Assistant

        Comment


          #19
          If the NIC's are Intel, count me in for 1 or 2. If their not Intel, I'm out. I'll be running Sophos UTM on them. It's picky about having Intel NIC's.

          Comment


            #20
            at $100 or less I would be interested in one Pete...

            Comment


              #21
              I really don't have any heartburn about lack of support for AES-NI. I don't think my pfSense2.4 box that I haven't even built will become instantly obsolete when 2.5 comes out. I am not sure the more robust encryption tentatively offered with 2.5 will be of any real benefit for a SOHO user. The more I read about it the more I agree with the cynics, this really feels like an effort by Netgate to drive more people to purchase their canned solutions.

              AMD Processors since 2011 have all had AES New instructions

              For Intel, according to ARK:

              Processors supporting AES-NI

              Processors NOT supporting AES-NI

              I would also prefer Intel NICs. I've read too many stories that seem to indicate that non-Intel NICs can be a problem. I have experienced this in my own computers where I have had to install Intel cards, because the Realtecs would not work properly. As far as AES-NI support is concerned, I would have to weigh cost and performance into the calculations before deciding one way or another.
              HS4 Pro, 4.2.19.0 Windows 10 pro, Supermicro LP Xeon

              Comment


                #22
                Something doesn't pass the smell test with me on this issue of ver 2.5 and the AES-NI requirement. Think of the implications. Does this mean that everyone who already has pfSense installed but on non AES-NI equipment will be either locked into their current version or will be forced to buy new hardware or go away? Why would the pfSense developer community allow that? Now what I can imagine is that there might be some new function introduced that requires AES hardware and if you don't have the hardware, you can't implement the new feature. However, everything else ought to run.

                Comment


                  #23
                  pfSense is still open source but the legal is telling:
                  "pfSense is Copyright 2004-2017 Rubicon Communications, LLC (Netgate)"

                  The developer community may no longer be driving the development.
                  HS4 Pro, 4.2.19.0 Windows 10 pro, Supermicro LP Xeon

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by rprade View Post
                    pfSense is still open source but the legal is telling:
                    "pfSense is Copyright 2004-2017 Rubicon Communications, LLC (Netgate)"

                    The developer community may no longer be driving the development.
                    Originally posted by rprade
                    There is no rhyme or reason to the anarchy a defective Z-Wave device can cause

                    Comment


                      #25
                      PFSense Firewall Group purchase interest

                      AES-NI has been out since around about 2010. Changes seem to be happening faster and faster in the Cryptographic world. Cryptographic technology's lifespans between initial release and depreciation is getting shorter and shorter. With more complex cryptographic systems going into place more processing is going to be required. It is a rat race.
                      The AES-NI requirement makes sense to me as the handoff can be programmed in and use existing hardware to augment and speed up the encryption/decryption process.

                      I replaced my old Linksys home router/AP running DD-WRT with PFsense and a Ubiquiti uap-ac-lite for a total of $340. My PFsense firewall runs on an i7-5500U CPU based mini-PC. The PC is honestly overkill for the amount of processing I actually do on my firewall, but it has AES-NI support. I run my Ubiquiti unifi passive controller on a spare RPI 1b and my AP is centrally mounted in my home. This is easily the best network and coverage I have ever had at home. What's more every time I look at protecting my network with some new service, PFsense can do it.
                      I get that many home users are going to feel the burn of the hardware requirement changes and I hope PFsense gives them an alternative. The best part about the way we deploy our network infrastructure is that we are not married to any given vendor. Also, If in 3 years PFsense does not give copacetic alternative, to "upgrade your CPU or else go away", consumers could go to the competition. We have alternatives (opnsense, clearOS, etc...).


                      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Pete,

                        Count me in for 1.


                        And if you decide to offer the pre-load. Count me on that too. I figure let the expert do their thing.

                        Thanks
                        Scott J.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by S-F View Post
                          100% sidetrack, but, maybe it's time to update your avatar Randy? Your pup isn't an infant any longer.
                          Here you go. New avatar above. He is a bit more of a dog now. At 16 months, I suppose he should be.
                          Attached Files
                          HS4 Pro, 4.2.19.0 Windows 10 pro, Supermicro LP Xeon

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by rprade View Post
                            pfSense is still open source but the legal is telling:
                            "pfSense is Copyright 2004-2017 Rubicon Communications, LLC (Netgate)"

                            The developer community may no longer be driving the development.
                            If the developer community doesn't like the direction, they will fork it.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by rprade View Post
                              pfSense is still open source but the legal is telling:
                              "pfSense is Copyright 2004-2017 Rubicon Communications, LLC (Netgate)"

                              The developer community may no longer be driving the development.
                              Clue.
                              Lead developer Chris Buechler moved to Ubiquity last year.

                              Z

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Originally posted by logbuilder View Post
                                If the developer community doesn't like the direction, they will fork it.
                                Unless the developers now work for Rubicon. Then their choices are a little limited.
                                HS4 Pro, 4.2.19.0 Windows 10 pro, Supermicro LP Xeon

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X