• Port Forwarding blocked the net connection! HELP

    Locked
    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    2k Views
    jimpJ

    You probably have NAT reflection enabled and didn't properly setup the NAT port forward.

    See here: http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Why_does_enabling_NAT_Reflection_break_web_surfing%3F

  • Traffic Redirection with Port Forwards

    Locked
    12
    0 Votes
    12 Posts
    10k Views
    D

    I tried, allow all already but still the same.
    Seem likes Pfsense do translate the source ip to the squid ip (nat)

    Here is the log

    1290995342.128    75 10.0.10.3 TCP_MISS/504 1881 GET http://thoisuso.net/chuyen-xe/xe-nguoi-dep/nguoi-mau-o-trien-lam-essen.html - DIRECT/27.0.14.21 text/html
    1290995343.950      2 10.0.10.3 TCP_NEGATIVE_HIT/504 1887 GET http://thoisuso.net/chuyen-xe/xe-nguoi-dep/nguoi-mau-o-trien-lam-essen.html - NONE/- text/html
    1290995344.470      2 10.0.10.3 TCP_NEGATIVE_HIT/504 1887 GET http://thoisuso.net/chuyen-xe/xe-nguoi-dep/nguoi-mau-o-trien-lam-essen.html - NONE/- text/html
    1290995344.703    57 10.0.10.3 TCP_NEGATIVE_HIT/504 1887 GET http://thoisuso.net/chuyen-xe/xe-nguoi-dep/nguoi-mau-o-trien-lam-essen.html - NONE/- text/html
    1290995344.830    19 10.0.10.3 TCP_NEGATIVE_HIT/504 1887 GET http://thoisuso.net/chuyen-xe/xe-nguoi-dep/nguoi-mau-o-trien-lam-essen.html - NONE/- text/html

    External squid with pfsense still not work right.  :'(

  • External Squid proxy transparent + dansgaurdian + Pfsense

    Locked
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    4k Views
    No one has replied
  • Passive Outbound FTP?!

    Locked
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    2k Views
    ?

    http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/FTP_Troubleshooting

  • Nat & routing on OPENVPN

    Locked
    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    3k Views
    H

    Hi, yes i will but i'll need a bit of time to get all the infos from the configuration.
    Thank you very much for your interest in our problem.

    OK the information on the 2 firewalls and the network:
    ** They are linked with a Site-to-Site VPN, and a MS Domain is working through it (not sure if this is important)

    The main Firewall:
       - 2 interfaces: WAN(static ip) and LAN(No bridging, 192.168.3.100/24, Disable the userland FTP-Proxy application)
       - Firewall: only configured rules as:
           LAN: pass (there was a second network but it is no longer so this is kind of useless)

    | * | LAN net | * | 192.168.1.0/24 | * | * | | to 192.168.1.x |
    | * | 192.168.1.0/24 | * | * | * | * | | 192.168.1.x subnet |
    | * | LAN net | * | * | * | * | | Default LAN -> any   |

    WAN: pass

    | * | * | * | * | * | * | | pass in all test rule |
    | TCP/UDP | * | * | * | 443 (HTTPS) | * | | Allow TCP/UDP to OpenVPN Server Port |
    | TCP/UDP | * | * | * | 1191 | * | | Allow TCP/UDP to OpenVPN Server Port |

    PPTP VPN: pass

    | * | PPTP clients | * | * | * | * | | allows incoming PPTP   |

    IPSEC: pass

    | * | * | * | * | * | * | | Permit IPSEC |

    Services: default
    Enable DHCP server on LAN interface: FALSE
    Subnet 192.168.3.0
    Subnet mask 255.255.255.0
    Available range: (192.168.3.0 - 192.168.3.255 ) - default readonly

    VPN:

    IPsec
    Tunnels: Enabled IPsec
    Mobile clients: Allow mobile clients:FALSE (basic config) PPTP: Enabled PPTP server
    Server address : xx.xx.xx.xx
    Remote address range: 192.168.50.x/28
    ….
    WINS server: 192.168.3.128 OpenVPN : Server
    1. No TCP 192.168.10.0/24 ovpn
    ** For external connections via OpenVPN client application
    Protocol: TCP
    Dymanic IP : true
    Local port: 443
    Address pool: 192.168.10.0/24
    Local network: 192.168.3.0/24

    Cryptography: BF-CBC(128bit)
    Authentication method: PKI

    DHCP-Opt.: DNS-Server: 192.168.3.128

    Custom options:push "dhcp-option DNS 192.168.3.128";push "dhcp-option DNS 192.168.3.129";push "dhcp-option WINS 192.168.3.128"; push "route 192.168.9.0 255.255.255.0";

    2. No TCP 192.168.11.0/24 Office 2 Server
    Protocol: TCP
    Dymanic IP : true
    Local port: 1191
    Address pool: 192.168.11.0/24
    Remote network: 192.168.9.0/24

    Cryptography: BF-CBC(128bit)
    Authentication method: Shared key

    DHCP-Opt.: NetBIOS node type: none

    LZO compression: true

    Description: Office 2

    ALL THE REST THAT ARE NOT DISPLAYED EITHER ARE NOT SET OR DISABLED

    The client, office 2, Firewall: System: there are 4 static routes, like 160.58.134.x, which point to the office 1 firewall 192.168.3.100
       - 2 interfaces: WAN(static ip) and LAN(No bridging, 192.168.9.100/24, Disable the userland FTP-Proxy application)
       - Firewall: only configured rules as:
           LAN: nothing
    WAN: pass

    | TCP/UDP | * | * | * | 1191 | * | | Tunnel |

    Services: default
    Enable DHCP server on LAN interface: TRUE
    Subnet 192.168.9.0
    Subnet mask 255.255.255.0
    Available range 192.168.9.0 - 192.168.9.255

    VPN:

    IPsec
    Tunnels: Enabled IPsec: FALSE (not enabled) PPTP: Off OpenVPN : Client
    No Firewall_1_WAN_IP TCP  Tunnel Connection 2 Office 1
    Protocol: TCP
    Server address : Firewall_1_WAN_IP (xx.xx.xx.xx)
    Server port: 1191
    Interface IP: 192.168.11.0/24
    Remote network: 192.168.3.0/24

    Proxy port: 3128

    Cryptography: BF-CBC(128bit)
    Authentication method: Shared key

    LZO compression: true

    Description: Tunnel 2 Office 1

    The rest is common configuration, default.
    So there is the office 1 network and the office 2 network, and then there are the ones for Site-to-Site VPN (192.168.11.x) and the one for the exterior VPN connection (192.168.10.x) - in which the clients can see each other even if they are in Office 1 or Office 2, what and where should I add a routing for the Office 1 to see the Office 2 clients?

    Note: No client from the office 1 can access the network at office 2 and no client from the office 2 can access its network mates if they have activated the OpenVPN Client App (which connects to the Office 1 VPN 1)

    Thank you very much

  • NAT / Alias Clarification

    Locked
    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    2k Views
    M

    @jimp:

    It should be considered the same, using only those specific ports.

    Well I appreciate that answer and one would think they would being a firewall system but also being with such trust is invested I just felt the need to ask first.  Thank you.

    UPDATE:
    Well I received an error when I tried the NAT port alias…hmm...same format as the other ports but when I removed the individuals and added the port alias it all screwed up.

  • MOVED: Use IPALIAS in Nat rule Pfsense 2.0 Beta 4

    Locked
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    1k Views
    No one has replied
  • No dropdown box external address in a nat rule anymore

    Locked
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    1k Views
    E

    It was changed to destination address.

  • Port Forward or DNS Forward?

    Locked
    9
    0 Votes
    9 Posts
    6k Views
    S

    Ok here was my solution, dreamslacker's method worked for me.

    It was timing out before because the firewall rules got messed up. It was opened for another interface. anyway, it was just carelessness on my part.

    Interface OPT2
    Source Addr *
    Source Port *
    Destintion Addr OPT2 Address
    Destination Port 80(HTTP)
    NAT IP 192.168.1.10
    NAT Port 80(HTTP)

    Then choose "create associated firewall rule" so it will automatically create a firewall rule for you. Otherwise you can manually create it.

    I also did this for OPT1 and WAN, so I have 3 internet IP's port forwarding 80 to the NAT IP.

    My next step is to point my DNS Host(A) to these IP addresses, that should, in theory, leave me with redundant IP addresses for my website.

  • [Solved]how to NAT Asterisk behind pfsense

    Locked
    9
    0 Votes
    9 Posts
    8k Views
    S

    I'd like to get a detailed explanation also, as I've got the same problem.
    Thnx in advance.

  • 1:1 NAT problem - Outgoing traffic uses general Outbound NAT

    Locked
    16
    0 Votes
    16 Posts
    10k Views
    T

    Hi,

    as I expected - creating dedicated Postfix replacing the second instance on the first server solve the problem (the ARP entries on pfSense for [192.168.100.5] and [192.168.100.12] are now different).

    However, I still do not understand the principles of how pfSense is building an outgouing NAT. Jimp, please, can you explain int for me?

    Thanks!

  • NAT worked in m0n0wall, but not in pfSense?!

    Locked
    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    2k Views
    H

    Thank you, this worked! (Static port) ;)

  • NAT is Splitting my connection speeds

    Locked
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    1k Views
    D

    So I attempted to disable the 2 NAT rules to the physical static addresses and I am still having the problem, I am using Manual AON and when i change it to Auto IPSec passthrough i get the speeds back…. It is only affecting download speeds not upload.

  • More RTP Issues

    Locked
    20
    0 Votes
    20 Posts
    9k Views
    G

    @ee99ee:

    I'll install siproxd this week and we'll see if that works.

    If you do, make sure that you configure siproxd in-line with this thread: http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,10084.0.html

    Specifically, I had to enter all information stated by Sammy2000 here:

    There is a little pitfall about configuring siproxd. You need to enter the following information, at least this is working for me…

    Inbound interface
    Outbound interface
    Listening port
    Enable RTP proxy
    RTP port range (lower)
    RTP port range (upper)
    RTP stream timeout

    If you dont have any special needs, just go with the defaulst and you will be fine...

    Actually that was all I needed - but I entered that information even if it was the default. The only thing different from the standard was my RTP range - due to a relayed AVM Fritzbox that handles the ISDN phones here and converts them to SIP. Used defaults for the others.

    [Edit] Or so I thought. Certain Voip phones could not get through though (initially tested wit mobile and funny enough that always worked). Solved by adding firewall rules to allow what's needed (SIP and RTP range for my box) - and now I'm fine for all calls.

    rules.png_thumb
    rules.png

  • Do I need NAT rules for this setup?

    Locked
    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    2k Views
    D

    Go to:  http://< ip of netgear here>/setup.cgi?next_file=mode.htm

    Select 'modem' from the drop-down box and it becomes an ADSL modem bridged to port '1'.

  • Server with multiple gateways

    Locked
    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    3k Views
    F

    Thank you I was hoping I did not have to do that but I will implement as you all suggested.

  • Port NAT doesnt work well

    Locked
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    2k Views
    D

    1)  Can you verify that the 'webserver' responds on both ports internally within the LAN segment to being with?

    2)  Is the Allow rule generated under 'WAN' section of the firewall rules for port 8080?

    3)  Is your ISP perhaps blocking '8080'?  Can you try changing it to perhaps, 6080 and try again?

  • How-to port forward on a URL address

    Locked
    6
    0 Votes
    6 Posts
    8k Views
    G

    HI,

    Thanks to all for the comments and suggestions.

    From that it looks like I will need a reverse proxy and a internal DNS forwarder for the MX records.

    As for the other ports I will manage them via a "jump" box.

    If any one has any other options or comments they are welcomed.

    Thanks
    George

  • 0 Votes
    4 Posts
    3k Views
    jimpJ

    I don't see any port forward entry in that list that would match your VOIP traffic.

    What I was wanting to see was the port forward entry you had that would redirect your phone traffic.

  • SIP ALG problem (stupid plain NAT)

    Locked
    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    23k Views
    D

    Cool.

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