Categories

  • 448 Topics
    1k Posts
    S

    I have a 2 TNSR routers connected to a pair of MLAG connected switches. I also have my own IPV4 subnet that is being announcec by BGP via Interface 1 on the first TNSR device. I have no problems at all right now, all of the servers on my network can access the internet and be accessed via their public IP address.

    What I am struggling with now is segregating clients into VLANs. When I create an access VLAN (22) for my client, I can no longer access the internet. My understanding is that I must create a bridge so that the VLAN22 can access the LAN interface with the gateway IP assigned. Each VLAN client will have a public IP from the single /24 subnet.

    When I followed the instructions for TNSR VLAN, nothing seemed to be problematic, but when I created the bridge things went wonky. Not only do the VLANs not work, but I also lose access to the non-VLAN devices.

    interface bridge domain 10
    flood
    uu-flood
    forward
    learn
    exit

    int Interface1
    bridge domain 10
    enable
    exit
    int Interface1.22
    bridge domain 10
    enable
    exit
    interface loopback bridgeloop
    instance 1
    exit
    interface loop1
    ip address 10.25.254.1/24
    bridge domain 10 bvi
    enable
    exit

    I did try changing the loop1 IP to my gateway IP and removing it from Interface1 but that didn't help. Maybe I am going about this wrong, but I need some guidance if possible.

    Thanks,
    Shawn

    For background:
    On TNSR device1:
    Interface1 is connected to a switch that carries my upstream BGP using a 10.34.14.0/24 address for now.
    Interface2 is the interface that has my gateway IP 23.x.x.x/24 and is also the port connected to the first switch.
    Interface3 is connected to a second switch and has no IP address

    TNSR device2 :
    Interface1 is connected to the switch that carreies the BGP but has no IP address and for all practical purposes is doing nothing

    Interface 2 is connected to the 2nd switch and has no IP address

    Interface 3 is connected to the first switch and has no IP address

    As you can see, the 2nd TNSR device is mostly sitting around doing nothing but eventually should be integrated in via VRRP or whatever I can get working.

  • 120k Topics
    761k Posts
    W

    Re: PfSense/Netgate/Starlink/Cisco ATA 191/Voip.ms Phone voip box intermittently loosing registration on voip.ms

    I seem to be having a problem with a Cisco SPA112 at this point. It had been working just fine up until I discovered yesterday that I had no dial tone.

    What lead into this problem was thinking I should upgrade to 280, and things went crazy with the error messages and the like.
    So I had to re-install pfSesne 272 using a DVD after some problem that caused both of my units to stop working (in this case an older box (A) running pfSense running an older CPU, and a newer box (B) running a faster CPU, more RAM and SSDs. I have documented that in another thread. Since getting things fixed, I have found that our SPA112 is not registering with our VOIP vendor. This SPA112 is on a FIXED IP address (static). And I have contacted them (VOIP vendor) about this, they pointed me to the pfSense doc on this and it is difficult for me to match the online doc to what I am seeing in the GUI. What could I have mangled in the basic install to cause this? I don't know enough to write rules for firewalls, and I don't do wild stuff with DHCP. I do set the system to NOT route IPV6 w/in my LAN. So I am puzzled as to what I broke in manually restoring these two boxes -- BTW, NOT running HA. If the one goes down, I manually swap in the other.

    The rest of my Lan seems to be fully functional. Our laptops can reach the printer and file server box, all our ROKU boxes are back to being fully functional.

  • 20k Topics
    127k Posts
    Y

    I'm late to the party but unless I misunderstand this thread it's not about Tailscale not starting up but instead about the auth key expiring.

    Auth keys are good for a maximum of 90 days. If you reboot pfSense on day 91, Tailscale will not come up and the "API" error will be generated (it's actually an auth key expired error).

    Thus, unless you never reboot pfSense, starting with the 91st day, you must re-generate an auth key and input it to Tailscale even if you have key expiry disabled.

    What makes this worse, IMHO, is that the longer you go between reboots, the more obscure the problem. So, Tailscale is not a reliable service because it cannot survive a reboot after 90 days.

    This occurs on both CE 2.7.2 in a Protectli Vault Proxmox VM and on a real SG-1100 running Plus 24.11 (packages as distributed with those releases).

  • 43k Topics
    267k Posts
    JeGrJ

    @dogfight76 said in Nach Stromausfall keine Verbindung mehr zur pfSense und dadurch keine Internet:

    Telnet/Komsole für Geräte kenne ich. Aber wo kann ich den Konsolen-Befehl auf der pfSense ausführen ?

    Du gehst entweder per SSH auf das Gerät oder du führst den Befehl in Diagnostics / Command Prompt als Konsolenbefehl aus. Der dauert dann meistens ein wenig. Danach solltest du bei Einstellen von 2.7.2 als Update Ziel wieder ein Update durchführen können.

    Danach wird dir garantiert dann 2.8 angezeigt. Alternativ kannst du auch schlicht den Netgate Installer runterladen und dir 2.8 einfach "drüber" installieren, dann bist du direkt ohne Umschweife auf der aktuellen Version.

    Cheers

  • Information about hardware available from Netgate

    2k Topics
    20k Posts
    dennypageD

    @Nightwolf said in Netgate 6100 LAN crashes:

    Is anything logged when this happens?
    The system logs are not telling me anything. The log is full of lines from syslogd that are not responding.
    I have disabled syslog but I can't find the source of the problem.

    Do you have remote syslog enabled? If so, is the syslog server on the same interface that stops working?

  • Information about hardware available from Netgate

    44 Topics
    211 Posts
    AriKellyA

    It looks like unified web management could be coming soon. It would be great if it means easier control and management of all web services in one place. Let's see if any companies announce more details about it!

  • Feel free to talk about anything and everything here

    3k Topics
    19k Posts
    L

    @Wylbur Thank you!

Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.