Yes, as that should be the out of box experience of the Route10 attempting to setup, correct?
I’m left scratching my head here, and maybe I just need to be set straight. To my understanding, in regards to a scenario where pfSense is utilized, the DHCP client table is only going to show devices that are being served DHCP. The ARP table will show devices will show IPv4 hosts trying to communicate to/through the firewall. As we are hoping for Route10 to host DHCP to its own subnet, I assumed we would would not want pfSense involved in that.
Interestingly, when pfSense hosts DHCP for the subnet 192.168.1.x we do see a different outcome. First, the Route10 shows in the DHCP client table @ 192.168.1.1, with a MAC address this time. I can pull up the setup page in the browser, eventually leading to “taking longer than usual.” Second, the Route10 creates another subnet 192.168.0.1. The PC connection on LAN3 instantly grabs 192.168.0.10, with access out to internet, no setup page needed. Going through the setup page to verify, the process is successful within seconds. Control grabs 192.168.0.11, with all setup pages being reachable. I ran out of time here to keep investigating, but I will have some time later this weekend.
Very interested in anyone’s thoughts here.