pfSense

Anyways, now the hardware can be a lot of things.

It could be a spare laptop, a virtual machine, that appliance that I use for PFSense in my last video, really anything that is X86 based can run OpenSense.

Here are the minimum and recommended specs.

What you choose depends on the size of your network and what features you enable.

So with that in mind, we thought that we can try to solve both these pain points.

And in particular, the one that is more interesting to me is how do you handle all these gateway devices, right? Fortinet, Ivanti, Cisco, PFSense, and so on and so on.

What do you mean by handle? Yeah, that's what I mean.

The problem is that everyone has a system administrator, right? Who in theory may or may not be responsible for them or others.

So all of that is not just doable, but we are doing it right now.

So we have a customer already who signed up for this kind of monitoring and we're looking for a few other pilots to especially to, let's say, give us access to more obscure devices.

So, OK, we have some experience with Fortinet because of the incident response with PFSense because we love PFSense and we use it.

So, we were looking for a few other pilots to give us access to, let's say, other types of devices such as Cisco, for instance, or Ivanti that we can monitor remotely with our agents in a read-only manner and to determine, let's say, an overall health assessment of the network and action points.

Arnavian’s reason for leaving OPNsense was blunt.

He said it’s insecure and its maintainers are incompetent, and that downstreams like pfSense and OPNsense with only a handful of maintainers just delay patches pointlessly.

He’d rather use upstream directly.

That’s the sharpest technical case on the board, and it has nothing to do with features.

Nobody puts patch latency on the marketing page.

There’s also a raw performance case.

A commenter going by bwgen82 found pfSense was giving him 10% of his WAN bandwidth because of how its PPPoE daemon threads.

10%.

And it's surprisingly easy to set up as well.

Much easier to use than PFSense, I find.

That's good.

I've heard nothing but great things about OpenSense.

Knowing and solving bufferbloat can significantly improve the quality of online activities that require low latency, such as video calls and online games.

Prerequisites hardware: router compatible with SQM Smart Queue Management or hardware compatible for the installation of alternative firmware such as OpenWrt, pfSense or OPNsense.

Software: access to a computer or mobile device to perform the bufferbloat test.

Connection: Ethernet connection to perform the bufferbloat test under optimal conditions.

Bufferbloat test solution with SQM if available.

Activate SQM to manage and prioritize requests from connected devices.

Consider installing alternative firmware such as OpenWrt, pfSense or OPNsense if your router does not support SQM.

Final considerations if latency spikes are evident, consider upgrading to a router that supports SQM.

Yeah.

And it is a fork of pfSense, if I recall correctly.

That's what I believe-

Chat is telling us