I've searched through the forums and see people had it running in xen on a beta version of Unraid 6.  There are some posts where people talk about running it under KVM, but none that said they succeeded.

I've searched through the forums and see people had it running in xen on a beta version of Unraid 6.  There are some posts where people talk about running it under KVM, but I none that said they succeeded.

I'd recommend against running PFSense on unRAID.  If unRAID stops working or you need to stop the array you will lose your internet.

@smidion:  I saw this concern raised in other threads. Here's my use case.

 

I have a main UR server that I keep my music, pictures, and personal files on.  I also have a second UR server that I use mainly for backing up the files on the first UR server that I can never replace such as the pictures of my kid. I only turn the second server on once a week when I update the backup, so the energy use is negligible. It's a shame though because the second UR machine is much more powerful than the Asus N-16 (running Tomato) that i use as a router.

 

My thought is that if I could run PfSense in a VM on the second UR machine, I could have a better router and have the machine available for backups all the time.  The second UR machine would run me about 40watts at idle, but I could turn off the Asus N-16 and save about 15 watts.  I think it is worth the extra 25 watts to have a better router and have the machine available to backup to all the time.

 

With UR's ability to run dockers and VMs there may be even be a few more "always on" appliances I could consolidate into the second UR machine so the net energy usage might be reduced even further. However, if I can't get PfSense to run under KVM, then it does not make sense to me to leave the 2nd UR machine on all the time just to be available for backups.

I am also attempting to run pfSense as a VM in unRAID v6.16 but struggling to understand if is possible to have the network and DHCP function as I'd like.  The unRAID box has 3 NICs, unRAID is running bare metal.

 

I have a pfSense VM running but am still searching to see if I can designate one NIC as the WAN connection and 1-2 of the other NIC(s) as LAN.  I would like unRAID to obtain its IP from the pfSense VM.  The server is on 24x7.

 

Before switching to unRAID bare metal, I was running unRAID as a guest in ESXi.  In ESXi I had pfSense running as a VM and everything was working good, but I'd like to see if I can run unRAID bare metal and have my pfSense router/firewall be between unRAID (LAN side) and my DSL modem (WAN side).

 

In the pfSense VM, how would you add multiple NICs so that one could be WAN and the other LAN?  How could you have unRAID bare metal be on the LAN side and obtain its IP from the pfSense VM?  Any tips or thoughts from the community?

I've got it up and running in the past, but without moving my phone line or my server it's not practical for me.  But here's how you do it.

 

You'll need to be able to passthrough a NIC with at least two ports, one for LAN and one for WAN. 

Thank you CHBMB!  That link worked (It's also a "sticky note" at the top of this topic, guess I missed that... )

 

I passed through 2 NICs to my pfSense VM.  In order to get everything to work following a reboot of my hardware, I needed to assign a static IP to the unRAID server and a static IP to one PC on my LAN (each static IP within the DHCP range of the pfSense VM DHCP server).  The PC on my LAN gets me access to the unRAID sever to start the array and start the pfSense VM.

 

However as smdion pointed out above, the unRAID server and the array must be started in order for the pfSense VM to be on/function, so I don't know how practical this setup really will be in the long run.  For now it's working but since I'll have to replace an array disk at some point and won't want to run the array unprotected, I think I either need to (1) revert to an ESXi configuration (running pfSense and unRAID as a guest) or (2) setup a second dedicated box to run pfSense.  I'm thinking option #2 would offer the most flexibility since it will allow me to run unRAID in a bare metal configuration and be able to temporarily shut down unRAID (if needed) but maintain my router/firewall, internet connection for the rest of my LAN.

Just for interest why do you need to manually start the unRAID array and the pfSense VM?  They could be both set to autostart I would have thought?  However whether this would introduce other issues I have no idea.

 

At the moment most people seem to have gone the route of a separate box for pfSense as far as I can see from forum posts.  However if unRAID introduces the ability to have VM's that run even when the array is stopped (which has been requested frequently) then the VM route is likely to be much more attractive and successful.

I thought about having both unRAID and the pfSense VM autostart.  I do have the pfSense VM autostart once the array is started but have refrained from having the array autostart just in case there is a bad disk, wrong configuration or something else.  Maybe this is overly cautious?

 

I'd like if there was a feature to designate VMs that could run when the array was stopped, if so then this configuration would work for me (and likely others).

 

Perhaps LimeTech is/could plan to incorporate a way to designate VMs that can run without the array started...

Starting VMs independant of the array is a feature that has been requested.  Maybe 6.2 will deliver, who knows?

 

I'd probably get the array to autostart and setup notifications, so any disk problems and it'll be delivered via pushbullet or similar.