4 ms·

opnsense. you dont need to run these garbage consumer routers. downside is if your ISP still provides a modem/CPE. but some times you can put those into bridge

by spydum 2y ago

opnsense. you dont need to run these garbage consumer routers. downside is if your ISP still provides a modem/CPE. but some times you can put those into bridge mode and make them less of a risk

WhackyIdeas 2y ago
Is something like that really that necessary though, sure it has a lot of features but for a simple router it takes 15mins to follow a guide on openbsd.org to set up a simple router which works really well and is really secure.
- vladvasiliu 2y ago
  Given GP's question, they're likely not someone who would spontaneously whip up an openbsd router. Maybe they don't care to fiddle with a command line, read up on dhcp servers, ipv6 router advertisements, pf configuration and what have you. In such a case, throwing opnsense on some machine, clicking around on three pages and calling it a day isn't that bad. The experience is close enough to an off-the-shelf router (except for the installation part), all the while getting a much better security situation.
  - WhackyIdeas 2y ago
    I actually found it easier understanding the openbsd router than pfsense when I tried it. The abstraction confused me personally.
IgorPartola 2y ago
I had so much trouble getting opnsense to work with Frontier fiber. Apparently Frontier does a non standard thing with their DHCP packets by tagging them as VLAN 0 and opnsense DHCP client was just silently dropping those. OpenWRT and Frontier’s router were fine. After three days I figured it out and now just have to compile my own version when I upgrade. I did submit a PR but not sure if it made it into a release.
uyzstvqs 2y ago
Definitely the best choice. You will still need APs for wireless, but they're behind your OPNsense firewall, so not connected directly to WAN like AP+router combos.
- ac29 2y ago
  An internal AP in a gateway device isnt "directly connected to WAN" any more than an external AP. In both cases it is behind a firewall (and NAT, if applicable).

by spydum 2y ago

opnsense. you dont need to run these garbage consumer routers. downside is if your ISP still provides a modem/CPE. but some times you can put those into bridge mode and make them less of a risk

WhackyIdeas 2y ago

Is something like that really that necessary though, sure it has a lot of features but for a simple router it takes 15mins to follow a guide on openbsd.org to set up a simple router which works really well and is really secure.

vladvasiliu 2y ago
Given GP's question, they're likely not someone who would spontaneously whip up an openbsd router. Maybe they don't care to fiddle with a command line, read up on dhcp servers, ipv6 router advertisements, pf configuration and what have you. In such a case, throwing opnsense on some machine, clicking around on three pages and calling it a day isn't that bad. The experience is close enough to an off-the-shelf router (except for the installation part), all the while getting a much better security situation.
- WhackyIdeas 2y ago
  I actually found it easier understanding the openbsd router than pfsense when I tried it. The abstraction confused me personally.

IgorPartola 2y ago

I had so much trouble getting opnsense to work with Frontier fiber. Apparently Frontier does a non standard thing with their DHCP packets by tagging them as VLAN 0 and opnsense DHCP client was just silently dropping those. OpenWRT and Frontier’s router were fine. After three days I figured it out and now just have to compile my own version when I upgrade. I did submit a PR but not sure if it made it into a release.

uyzstvqs 2y ago

Definitely the best choice. You will still need APs for wireless, but they're behind your OPNsense firewall, so not connected directly to WAN like AP+router combos.

ac29 2y ago
An internal AP in a gateway device isnt "directly connected to WAN" any more than an external AP. In both cases it is behind a firewall (and NAT, if applicable).