NAT

• B

  H.323 Video Conference Codec behind PFSense *Guide / Explanation*
  • BitXer0

  3
  0
  Votes
  3
  Posts
  18481
  Views

  D

  Long story short, to use H.323 behind a pfsense firewall, one needs to enable static-port NAT. Unfortunately neither H.323 nor SIP were designed with NAT in mind, in which case one needs either an ALG (which btw is part of Linux's netfilter since many years, but apparently missing from baseline pf/FreeBSD) or a NAT device that won't rewrite ports (a solution that will work if you only have one such device). Edit: Note that SIP software has been improved in recent years, and most recent implementations can work through NAT without a need for ALG or static ports, but it's still something one has to keep in mind when troubleshooting SIP issues.
• C

  Port Forward Troubleshooting
  • cmb

  1
  0
  Votes
  1
  Posts
  25342
  Views

  No one has replied

• P

  NAT Outbound Separators (pls)
  • postables

  5
  0
  Votes
  5
  Posts
  79
  Views

  P

  I'd prefer to avoid posting the NAT rules to prevent disclosing anything, but I can summarize a small example. I have disabled automatic outbound NAT rules which I think is the main reason for needing so many. Additional each host needs to have each and every service white-listed. I suppose automatic outbound NAT could be used, but from a security standpoint im not to inclined to allow a free-for-all of any service simply being able to punch holes. For example for 3 of our IPFS nodes they have three separate NICs on our local network that have unique IP addresses. Each NIC is responsble for providing a few services: IPFS swarm ports IPFS gateway ports API ports that means each machine then needs a total of 3 NAT rules per port, for a total of 9 NAT rules per host. As there are three of these same hosts that means 27 NAT rules need to be allocated. We have a few other services like: STORJ nodes I2P nodes Ethereum nodes Monero nodes Bitcoin nodes I'll open up a feature request on redmine and investigate jimp's comment, but it seems strange that port forwarding has separates, while outbound has none. Let me know if I can provide anymore information
• K

  FTP server backup WP - Can read but not write! (Local work perfect)
  • Khampol

  4
  0
  Votes
  4
  Posts
  73
  Views

  K

  Ok I set a SFTP server port 22. Do we need passive port for this too?
• O

  Set up a port forward, still not connectable
  • Octopuss

  5
  0
  Votes
  5
  Posts
  59
  Views

  O

  Just FIY - there was some sort of a firewall running on the AP on the roof, and after contacting our ISP it was deactivated, and now it seems to work like it should.
• N

  NAT with IPSEC
  • nikkopegmail.com

  3
  0
  Votes
  3
  Posts
  56
  Views

  N

  Thanks Steve ! Will try to to nat in P2. cheers, pete
• H

  1:1 nat and bridge on with 3 interfaces?
  • hypemedia

  4
  0
  Votes
  4
  Posts
  65
  Views

  

  It would not necessarily show in the ARP table unless pfSense has been talking to it directly. The ISP would need to ARP for it and it back to the gateway but that is transparent through the bridge at layer 2. What exactly is not working? What is working? How are you testing? Steve
• F

  port forwarding not working
  • fionnmaccumhail

  2
  0
  Votes
  2
  Posts
  49
  Views

  F

  p.s. nat reflection is on, and i setup the dns forwarder.
• S

  Redirect to wrong IP destination.
  • sbeaudoin

  7
  0
  Votes
  7
  Posts
  86
  Views

  

  If the wrong server is responding then the wrong server is responding to 10.0.20.7. Do a packet capture on the inside interface for connections to 10.0.20.7 TCP port 443. Test a connection in from the outside. Do you see the SYN going out the local interface? Is it destined for 10.0.20.7? What responds? You might need to look at the MAC addresses here to see what's really going on.
• J

  Enable Protocol 4 and 93 (IPIP Tunnel)
  • jfalcon

  5
  0
  Votes
  5
  Posts
  3209
  Views

  M

  @luzemario I'm new to ampr and would like to setup my router for it. Could I get some assistance on getting my allocation going? Thanks
• W

  pfsense keeps blocking Cloudflare sever IP range
  • Wepee

  7
  0
  Votes
  7
  Posts
  165
  Views

  W

  My next question how to create a whitelist of the following Cloudflare IP addresses, in pfblockerNG, at the very top order in WAN rule. 103.21.244.0/22 103.22.200.0/22 103.31.4.0/22 104.16.0.0/12 108.162.192.0/18 131.0.72.0/22 141.101.64.0/18 162.158.0.0/15 172.64.0.0/13 173.245.48.0/20 188.114.96.0/20 190.93.240.0/20 197.234.240.0/22 198.41.128.0/17
• T

  Firewall stopped forward packets on upgrade from 2.4.4-p1 to 2.4.4-p2.
  • thouwlin

  1
  0
  Votes
  1
  Posts
  47
  Views

  No one has replied

• A

  How to directly connect clients of a VPN server set behind pfSense to get their own IPs on the DHCP?
  • alaaelrifaie

  1
  0
  Votes
  1
  Posts
  58
  Views

  No one has replied

• A

  Setting up pfSense as a cloud firewall for my Vultr private network
  • alaaelrifaie

  3
  0
  Votes
  3
  Posts
  68
  Views

  No one has replied

• C

  Double NAT and VPN issue
  • comet424

  1
  0
  Votes
  1
  Posts
  47
  Views

  No one has replied

• V

  wan -- pfsense -- Juniper SRX ipsec not working.
  • virtualliquid

  19
  0
  Votes
  19
  Posts
  160
  Views

  V

  Best I can do is a picture of the output.
• 

  [Why] pfSense doesn't port-forward with gateway group set as default?
  • skilledinept

  2
  0
  Votes
  2
  Posts
  64
  Views

  

  Having the same gateway on multiple interfaces is likely the problem. It works, sort of, with PPPoE, but it's not a configuration we recommend or technically support, due to issues like this. Probably the requests are coming in one interface and then it can't figure out which way to send the replies.
• I

  What Am I Missing? Port Forwarding/Websites not working New to Networking.
  • itstheburns

  18
  0
  Votes
  18
  Posts
  163
  Views

  I

  The original issue was that I could not get port forwarding to work with my camera NVRs (2 of them), some websites were slow or not loading and could not access my ISP's website and email. I had port forwarding setup in the wrong order or something. I reinstalled pfsense and redid all of the port forwarding rules after I found a very detailed video that basically explained firewall aliases much better than the pfsense documentation. That made setting up my port forwarding so much easier and took only 5 mins Port forwarding is working as it should and lightning fast compared to before. As for my ISPs website or email not working, I was not able to access those from within my network on any client, whether it be PC or mobile device. It all worked fine on my asus router before I started using pfsense so I was stumped. My ISP is probably doing some wonky stuff with resolving or whatever. By adding Google's DNS servers has fixed this issue. Nothing else I tried was able to fix it. I would only change one setting at a time, apply and retry. If that did not work, I would revert back and try a different setting. In short, everything seems to be working on every client both within and outside my network.
• X

  LAN to Virtual WAN IP not working
  • xorpierre

  1
  0
  Votes
  1
  Posts
  61
  Views

  No one has replied

• V

  OpenVPN behind main PfSense main GW/FW
  • vince_gw

  3
  0
  Votes
  3
  Posts
  118
  Views

  V

  Are the VPN endpoints the default gateways in their LANs? Have you assigned an interface to the OpenVPN instance on both sites?
• B

  Automated scripts for Private Internet Access port forwarding
  • Bagpuss

  54
  0
  Votes
  54
  Posts
  31204
  Views

  B

  @pnot Have re-uploaded the files in post 2. I'm guessing the move to new forum software broke the original links. Apologies for not responding sooner.
• D

  NAT a Windows share from WAN?
  • Dennis100

  12
  0
  Votes
  12
  Posts
  179
  Views

  

  Your actual box behind pfsense is not talking to 1195, pfsense would be talking to other pfsense on that port to create the tunnel. Your traffic is then routed down that tunnel.
• R

  NAT Reflection with external IP from LAN
  • rusoo7

  9
  0
  Votes
  9
  Posts
  135
  Views

  R

  @derelict said in NAT Reflection with external IP from LAN: When NAT reflection is used to access a server on the same subnet as the connecting client you will lose the source IP address of the client. This is because if the server receives a connection from the same subnet it is on, the reply will not go back to the firewall and the firewall TCP state will break. This is generally considered poor network design. Using Split DNS will solve this problem without NAT reflection. Appreciate your reply. I wish asked this question 3 weeks ago when i setup the boxes.
• B

  NAT / IPSec - Several sites interconnection puzzle
  • Bruno Rodrigo

  5
  0
  Votes
  5
  Posts
  263
  Views

  K

  @bruno-rodrigo said in NAT / IPSec - Several sites interconnection puzzle: One last try... Is this an impossible approach? Does anyone knows how to solve this? Hey what are the phase 2 settings FW3<-> client ? I'm interested in leftsubnet/rightsubnet what are the phase 2 settings FW1<-> FW2 ? I'm interested in leftsubnet/rightsubnet which default gateway is FW3 ? 10.100.1.3 can ping 10.99.1.1 or any other host 10.99.1.0/24?
• C

  Port Forwarding not working?!
  • Connor234

  21
  0
  Votes
  21
  Posts
  427
  Views

  C

  Hi Everyone, thank you for all of your advise i have managed to fix the issue by resetting the firewall and the web-server.
• V

  problem for routing specific traffic through gre ipsec tunnel
  • vistatech

  24
  0
  Votes
  24
  Posts
  299
  Views

  K

  @vistatech Hey As I said , PF does not always work correctly with GRE over IPSEC. Try to do so disable GRE interface reboot Verify that THE IPSec tunnel is established enable the GRE interface 5.verify
• D

  NAT Outbound Pool in a High Availability enviroment?
  • defunct78

  5
  0
  Votes
  5
  Posts
  105
  Views

  D

  OK, that makes sense. Thanks for the quick response.
• L

  Issues with virtual IP routing :-/
  • landman16

  2
  0
  Votes
  2
  Posts
  101
  Views

  L

  Ohh looks like I resolved the issue by forcing all traffic through gateway :-)
• A

  Once again: no internet access for VLAN
  • Art Mooney

  22
  0
  Votes
  22
  Posts
  341
  Views

  

  Your right about the source being only opt1 good catch, I didn't catch that - sorry.
• L

  Port forwarding to the VPN IPsec tunnel
  • lukaszc

  4
  0
  Votes
  4
  Posts
  139
  Views

  L

  OK - over an OpenVPN tunnel works fine - Thanks
• D

  Virtual IP to Outgoing Address
  • darvin

  2
  0
  Votes
  2
  Posts
  110
  Views

  V

  It's possible to use virtual IPs for forwarding, but it's not possible to assign 192.168.1.125 to the client LAN, since that IP is out of the server LANs network. However, you don't need to assign a virtual IP for what you intent if pfSense is the default gateway in the client LAN. If so, just add a NAT port forwarding rule to the client LAN for dest: 192.168.1.125:443 target: 195.78.228.226:443 and it will do the job.
• 

  Outgoing NAT'ing from a single IP
  • _neok

  12
  0
  Votes
  12
  Posts
  195
  Views

  

  @_neok said in Outgoing NAT'ing from a single IP: @jimp thanks for reply. I was able to make it work. There are some tricks to make it work well. Now I have to go. Tomorrow I write how I made it work. Bye Gabriel I had a rule to allow me to navigate my entire LAN through another gateway. I had to make an IP alias of my LAN by taking out the local IP in question. Along with that I set the local IP to go out to the internet through the same gateway over which is the interface that has the VIP associated. That, in combination with the Hybrid Outbound NAT and that's it. I was able to fix it. Thanks for help Best regards Gabriel
• A

  need help in outbound traffic through vips from lan
  • ahmedkunnana

  5
  0
  Votes
  5
  Posts
  109
  Views

  

  Never set Outbound NAT from source any. Set it to the inside networks that actually need NAT to happen. I would suggest you start by enabling automatic mode and trying again unless you can state why you need manual outbound NAT.
• M

  pureFtpd server on pfsense DMZ, cannot be acceed by LAN with passive port range set
  nat pureftpd passive • • Maelvon

  6
  0
  Votes
  6
  Posts
  200
  Views

  M

  @johnpoz My configuration in: System / Advanced / Firewall & NAT / Network Address Translation / NAT Reflection mode for port forwards is set to "NAT + Proxy" and when I set to "Pure NAT", I can list the ftp content from LAN So, it seems a solution, as it works. But as I have set Squid Proxy, perhaps it's not a good idea to set "Pure NAT"? Otherwise, can I create a rule which simulate the "Pure NAT" setup with "NAT + Proxy"?
• S

  Moving from VYOS to PSFSENSE
  • simonuk1

  4
  0
  Votes
  4
  Posts
  134
  Views

  N

  Never done it myself but try:- https://www.netgate.com/docs/pfsense/book/nat/1-1-nat.html#example-ip-address-range-1-1-configuration
• W

  Web Server & SSH port forward issues
  port forward ssh dual lan • • Wafflez19

  7
  0
  Votes
  7
  Posts
  226
  Views

  W

  @kom The first link I glanced over before but I can now access the web server both on the WAN and LAN. I'm even able to ssh to it from LAN to OPT1. I don't remember if it was one of the videos you linked or some random third video but I didn't understand that request get sent out on a random port. So those source ports would have never worked. Sorry for not understanding that sooner. Thank you for the references and your time.
• W

  Redirect to Wan IP
  • wes93

  1
  0
  Votes
  1
  Posts
  136
  Views

  No one has replied

• A

  Forward Traffic from Virtual IP to target behind WAN
  • AWeidner

  7
  0
  Votes
  7
  Posts
  211
  Views

  A

  @kom said in Forward Traffic from Virtual IP to target behind WAN: OK. Now what about the captures? That's the only way to really see what's happening. I went the easy route and ditched my previous attempts. I just created Port Forwarding Rules for the required hosts. Not elegant, but works for me. Interface Protocol Source Address Source Ports Dest. Address Dest. Ports NAT IP NAT Ports LAN TCP/UDP * * 192.168.20.2 1 - 65535 192.168.1.2 1 - 65535 LAN TCP/UDP * * 192.168.20.1 1 - 65535 192.168.1.1 1 - 65535 Sorry for the delay (blame it on the holidays )
• S

  Transparently Intercept and Redirect DNS Traffic to an Internal DNS
  • starrypenfold

  9
  0
  Votes
  9
  Posts
  244
  Views

  S

  That's very true - I'd missed that his log was showing the router's IP, whoops :) I'm not sure how to explain the third dig screenshot though - it seems like his client asks for 8.8.8.8, and gets a response that is artificially from 8.8.8.8 (even though it actually came from his Pi-hole). Or am I misunderstanding that? I said I can't imagine it would out-do pfSense ;) I certainly agree with you on capability. I've recommended the USG to some friends that would have been far less comfortable with pfSense, and needed something simple that largely 'just worked' out of the box with some future control if they wanted to delve a little deeper. In their case, they were upgrading from crappy ISP routers, and I didn't want to recommend an off-the-shelf consumer router from Asus, Netgear etc.
• T

  Adding large number of NAT policy without disturbing the existing NAT conf.
  • Thoufiq

  20
  0
  Votes
  20
  Posts
  389
  Views

  T

  @johnpoz If we create 1:1 NAT then we have to create IPalias(VIP) for each public IP ryt?