• pfSence box loosing DHCP connection on WAN.

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    222 Views
    S

    Did you try putting the toggle script in pfsense. I had a similar problem and saw this trick online which worked for me.
    Login to you pfsense command line,
    Create a new file using vi with the command -> vi /etc/rc.local
    Add the lines below -

    ifconfig de0 down (use the right name for your WAN port, mine was de0)
    ifconfig de0 up
    dhclient de0

    save and exit
    Then give the file root access by executing command "chmod 755 /etc/rc.local"
    reboot

    Hopefully this should work for you too.

  • SG-1000 - Send DNS queries over TLS

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    366 Views
    Michel-angeloM

    Thanks Jimp.

  • Multiwan, WAN2 never gets dns servers?

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    174 Views
    No one has replied
  • stupid question

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    583 Views
    P

    VM Superhub usually defaults to 192.168.0.0/24 subnet so your LAN subnet of 192.168.1.0/24 should not conflict. . .. so far so good.

    Is the SG-1000 WAN configured for DHCP ? If so then it should receive a suitable IP & Gateway from the VM Hub. Ideally you should set the SG-1000 WAN with a static IP & Gateway in the VM subnet, but outside the VM DHCP range.

    Although this is double-NAT it works. side benefit is that when VM updates the Superhub software it doesn't break your IP network !! If you use Modem Mode, this gets reset during Docsis software updates.

    VM Superhub subnet = 192.168.0.0/24

    SG-1000 WAN
    IP Address = 192.168.0.253 /24
    WAN Gateway = 192.168.0.1 (VM Superhub IP)
    DNS Server = VM superhub 192.168.0.1

    SG-1000 LAN
    IP Address = 192.168.123.1 /24
    DNS Resolver = Enabled (Network Interfaces = ALL)
    DHCP Server = 192.168.123.101 to 199

    Also you need to Allow Private Networks on the WAN interface, otherwise the Superhub cannot communicate with the SG-1000 WAN.

  • cant connect to internet with second WAN interface/ip

    17
    0 Votes
    17 Posts
    2k Views
    O

    hi, i already saw the problem, my outbound rules is set to manual and it is all directed to my first WAN.

    thanks for the reply guys

  • Dreamhost Dynamic DNS update script

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    3k Views
    R

    Agh! I can't believe I didn't bookend this thread. So sorry community! Somebody was nice enough to help me out on the Dreamhost forum here: https://discussion.dreamhost.com/t/subdomain-ddns-with-pfsense/67249/4

    Essentially: you create an API key in your Dreamhost admin panel then use it as your password in the PFSense interface. Full instructions are in that link...

  • 2012 DHCP and pfsense

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    195 Views
    No one has replied
  • Can't resolve names after blocking rfc1918

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    554 Views
    J

    @kom said in Can't resolve names after blocking rfc1918:

    Block rfc1918 only applies to unsolicited inbound traffic, not replies to your outbound traffic.

    Yes, I know, that's why I don't understand why making that one changed caused this.
    Clients are both, can't resolve anything from any of them.
    I've since replaced the router with a spare I had and everything is working again.
    Something got screwed up in the config, kinda wish I can figure out what it is but I'll probably just reset it and see if it works again.

  • DNS resolver - Domain Override with MS AD

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    682 Views
    L

    @lolman88
    i found the solution by myself

    The option: "Outgoing Network Interfaces" must have "ALL" included.
    I only got the WANs there, but this doenst work.

  • DHCP - No Free Leases (pf_2.4.3-release-p1)

    61
    0 Votes
    61 Posts
    9k Views
    F

    @ihugof I had this problem before and since my network lease isn't huge as yours, manual (deleting expired leases) manipulation on dhcp service was my workaround.

  • DHCP Service not renewing IP lease

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    526 Views
    F

    Thanks Grimson. That's kind of same with my scenario.

    After reading the entire discussion, it turns out that we have different source of problem. I'll come back with DHCP info.

  • services and sites are no longer accessible after posting 2.4.4

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    319 Views
    F

    0_1540328105218_DNS Resolver Advanced Settings.png
    Last 190 DNS Resolver Log Entries. (Maximum 190)
    Oct 23 21:57:20 unbound 41539:2 notice: remote address is 10.200.3.17 port 46382
    Oct 23 21:57:20 unbound 41539:2 notice: sendto failed: Invalid argument
    Oct 23 21:57:17 unbound 41539:1 notice: remote address is 10.200.3.17 port 35019
    Oct 23 21:57:17 unbound 41539:1 notice: sendto failed: Invalid argument
    Oct 23 21:50:47 unbound 41539:0 info: generate keytag query _ta-4a5c-4f66. NULL IN
    Oct 23 21:50:47 unbound 41539:2 info: generate keytag query _ta-4a5c-4f66. NULL IN
    Oct 23 21:50:44 unbound 41539:0 info: start of service (unbound 1.7.3).
    Oct 23 21:50:44 unbound 41539:0 notice: init module 1: iterator
    Oct 23 21:50:44 unbound 41539:0 notice: init module 0: validator
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 32.000000 64.000000 4
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 16.000000 32.000000 2
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 8.000000 16.000000 3
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 2.000000 4.000000 1
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 0.131072 0.262144 2
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 0.065536 0.131072 1
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 0.032768 0.065536 7
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: lower(secs) upper(secs) recursions
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: [25%]=0.0561737 median[50%]=0.262144 [75%]=24
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: histogram of recursion processing times
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: average recursion processing time 11.680555 sec
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: server stats for thread 3: requestlist max 4 avg 1.75 exceeded 0 jostled 0
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: server stats for thread 3: 27 queries, 7 answers from cache, 20 recursions, 0 prefetch, 0 rejected by ip ratelimiting
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 32.000000 64.000000 1
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 16.000000 32.000000 8
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 8.000000 16.000000 5
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 4.000000 8.000000 3
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 1.000000 2.000000 1
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 0.524288 1.000000 1
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 0.262144 0.524288 2
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 0.131072 0.262144 5
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 0.065536 0.131072 4
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 0.032768 0.065536 3
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: lower(secs) upper(secs) recursions
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: [25%]=0.16384 median[50%]=4.66667 [75%]=17.5
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: histogram of recursion processing times
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: average recursion processing time 8.791496 sec
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: server stats for thread 2: requestlist max 4 avg 2.0303 exceeded 0 jostled 0
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: server stats for thread 2: 50 queries, 17 answers from cache, 33 recursions, 0 prefetch, 0 rejected by ip ratelimiting
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 16.000000 32.000000 2
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 8.000000 16.000000 3
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 4.000000 8.000000 1
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 2.000000 4.000000 1
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 0.262144 0.524288 1
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 0.131072 0.262144 3
    Oct 23 21:50:41 unbound 71806:0 info: 0.065536 0.131072 5

  • DNS Resolver - strange lookup (Vodafone WiFiCalling not working)

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    2k Views
    E

    I think it is not broken. Vodafone do not want their clients to use WiFi calling outside Germany.
    So the hostname epdg.epc.drz1.vodafone-ip.de is only resolved in Germany.
    I experienced the issue with my companies network. We were bought an american company. They switched the firewall etc to US. Ie all DNS queries were routed through US. From that time onwards WiFi calling was not working any longer.
    I asked them to add an exception ie the domain vodafone-ip.de should directly be queried at drz1.vodafone-ip.de
    Then it was working again.

  • 100 DNS errors on ipleak.net when upgrading to 2.4.4

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    2k Views
    S

    I've tried asking on the IPLeak forums about what the 100 errors mean and no one has come back to me with an informative reply. Best i can figure out the errors signify that no DNS servers were found or able to be verified as leaking or not.

    While i can't rule out the possibility that its more an issue with IPLeak or something else, to me it seems very conclusive that the problem lies with the update to PFsense and its dns resolver feature.

    I've checked, double checked and triple checked that the settings I'm using in 4.4 are the same as what i use in 4.3. I've had 2 boxes running side by side, one using 4.3 and the other using 4.4.

    In 4.4 it fails to work and i get the 100 errors. In 4.3 it works fine and i get 1 result with no leaking detected and more importantly no errors. It's not the browser or computer i use to access the site that's the problem as they stay they same. The only thing that changes is what version of PFSense I use.

    I've even tried setting up PFSense to act as a router to my main internet connection so as to eliminate openvpn being an issue along with the other settings i use to make the openvpn connection work how i need it to.

    Putting my ISP's router into modem mode and configuring PFSense in a very basic setup to get the IP from the modem and then accessing IPLeak through this box the problem still occurs. Where as if i access IPLeak through my ISP's router without the PFSense box i get no errors and it all works fine.

    I understand what's been said about if it's wise to use a VPN providers testing site but it's what i've used without a problem in the past and can still use perfectly fine in every other scenario besides if PFSense 2.4.4 is used.

    This make me believe that the common fault is PFSense regardless of the sites motives and trustfulness.

    The only thing i can think of where it's not PFSense that's the problem is that in the update to the dns resolver feature its 'improved' things to the point its now incompatible with an old way of doing the dns checking or something that IPLeak uses.

    If this is the cases then that's great. I can accept that. My only issue with this being the case then stems from the question: How do i know for sure and how do i figure out where the fault actually lies?

  • 0 Votes
    4 Posts
    668 Views
    johnpozJ

    Restart the dhcpd

  • Normal tracerotue for mail.google.com to china?

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    635 Views
    S

    I had similar/identical traceroute from a Mac OS X client and on the pfSense box itself using 127.0.0.1(unbound).

    Seems like it would be interesting to have unbound log when DNSSEC could not be used becuase the root keys are invalid, either the time on pfSense is wrong or the ISP is doing layer 7 manipulation. i.e. like what happens when you live in China, Russia or the USA...

  • Is TLS resumption possible for DNS over TLS

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    256 Views
    jimpJ

    Not yet possible in Unbound. There is an open feature request for that in Unbound itself.

    https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/bugs-script/show_bug.cgi?id=4089

    See also: https://nlnetlabs.nl/pipermail/unbound-users/2018-July/010743.html

  • DNS Query time always 0 msec

    9
    0 Votes
    9 Posts
    2k Views
    KOMK

    Thanks for the update. Good to see the Universal Windows Fix also applies to other stuff, too 😁

  • Does Unbound Honor Gateway Monitoring?

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    168 Views
    No one has replied
  • Ruting DNS Server

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    295 Views
    No one has replied
Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.