• NAT deaktivieren

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    310 Views
    V

    @ralf-0
    Firewall > NAT > Outbound > Disable Outbound NAT rule generation

  • Strange behaviour, NAT worked for 2 years, not anymore

    9
    0 Votes
    9 Posts
    748 Views
    M

    SOLVED

    Thanks for your help, by reading and thinking you helped me find the solution.

    I found the fail!
    It was done by myself.

    I made a new NAT rule 3 weeks ago, in that rule i included port 8282 on block. I tuned the NAT rule, removed 8282 block, viola, all ports that I need to be open is now open:

    5da1e541-e972-48d2-98b4-b221fb776202-image.png

  • @ PFSNSE

    7
    0 Votes
    7 Posts
    697 Views
    B

    @johnpoz
    I recreated the Nat rule i was successful in getting this to work, currently monitoring the connection.

    Thanks for your effort, Thanks

  • SNAT Prerouting

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    425 Views
    B

    Works by doing the NAT configuration on the IPsec Phase 2 and a static route to the remote subnet pointing to inside interface.

    NAT with IPsec Phase 2 Networks
    Routing and gateway considerations

    Thank you so much, @viragomann.

  • pfSense 2.5.0.a.20201127.0650 NAT Issues

    22
    0 Votes
    22 Posts
    4k Views
    stephenw10S

    Despite extensive testing before release it's still possible to hit this in 2.5.1 CE but not as far as we know in 21.02.2 (Plus). Though it's unclear what the difference there is.
    https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/11805

    Steve

  • The target port range must be an integer

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    491 Views
    A

    @gertjan

    Thank you so much for the support!

    My mistake was to put the start and end port different in this case, on other firewalls it works like this.

    Thanks again and have a nice day!

  • Port Forwarding suddenly not working

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    306 Views
    I

    actually it was a pfsense update problem:

    https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/11805

    update to 2.6.0 and its fine now.

    hope they release a hotfix for stable version soon.

  • ICMP responses for some IP-addresses are not propagated to LAN interface

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    244 Views
    No one has replied
  • NAT broken for a single rule

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    497 Views
    Cool_CoronaC

    Have you tried to remove the GW's on the rules and let the FW handle them by itself?

  • 1:1 NAT Issue with UDP After Upgrade to 21.02.2 on SG5100

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    244 Views
    No one has replied
  • Inbound NAT with Multi WAN broken with 21.02?

    22
    5 Votes
    22 Posts
    3k Views
    C

    @michael_kappler

    https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/11436#note-56

    FYI

  • Cannot access private IP's on Comcast Router

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    245 Views
    No one has replied
  • Help with NAT rules

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    275 Views
    No one has replied
  • Hosting nextcloud behind 1 WAN

    4
    0 Votes
    4 Posts
    595 Views
    W

    I wouldn't because, in my view, that complicates things.

    You have two services that need http and https. You have to pic one for each port.

    In a virtual server setup you can serve http and https depending on the host name request.

    1 server > 2 websites

    Unfortunately you have...

    2 servers > 2 websites (your firewall http and your nextcloud http)

    This is why you need to (again, in my view):

    1 - Go to: system > advanced > change your port to something else, like me. I serve it on port 10000

    Note: You will want to first make a firewall rule to allow port 10000 on your WAN. Firewall > Rules > Floating allow any to 10000 TCP

    3df86e09-c752-41f5-bf25-5defabacc795-image.png

    Here's the advanced web port change.

    ee4e99d8-2824-4902-bda3-ab02085fdfb9-image.png

    Once you change your web port on your firewall from http port 80 /https port 443 > you've free'd those up to be used on something else. Now you're doing http/https on port 10000 :-)

    Now you can make a NAT rule:

    firewall > nat > that says, anything from your WAN on http port 80 and https port 443 > go to your private IP 192.168.1.whatever (or whatever private IP's you're using).

    Hope that helps.

    That's how we've done these things in the past. Not using standard ports on your firewall for web management helps cut down on the BS even though they'll find you eventually. 10000 is a common port used in web servers as is 8080, and many others.

    Alternatively, you could host your nextcloud on an alternative port too like 4434 or something and NAT 4434 > 443 on your private LAN side too. That would maintain the firewall defaults BUT we've found when publishing your owncloud URL that people will often hit the firewall interface not knowing they need to type in https://ip_address_here:4434
    ...so it can get confusing.

    Always take a backup of your firewall before making and testing these changes :)

  • ATT fiber /29 block use with pfsense

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    3k Views
    C

    1:1 nat appears to be working to give my server one of those static addresses

    Screen Shot 2021-04-12 at 3.04.46 PM.png

    Screen Shot 2021-04-12 at 3.05.43 PM.png

  • Prot forwarding - Add associated filter rule - missing tagging option.

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    239 Views
    No one has replied
  • Port Foward on SG-3100

    2
    1 Votes
    2 Posts
    360 Views
    T

    @resortowner25
    Check their documentation.
    https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/nat/port-forwards.html

    Netgate also made a more current video about this configuration.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFAuK_m7JxE

  • NAT/PAT and associated filter rules

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    327 Views
    V

    @dardou
    Since both NAT rules handles different unique destination addresses they do not overlap.

    If another public IP (let's say 122.0.0.0.4) comes in to 200.0.0.1/9999

    Both rules don't match to this. The first has a different destination IP and the second is restikt to a uniqe source IP which does not match to this.

    The filter rules come into play after NAT.

  • multi wan port forwarding is broke in PRO version

    4
    1 Votes
    4 Posts
    517 Views
  • /30 nat on DMZ

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    416 Views
    S

    I don't think it's going to work to have the same public IP subnet on both the router WAN and the DMZ. It won't know where to route. I think you'll need to use 1:1 NAT to forward the IPs to the DMZ servers.

    re: outbound NAT try
    Source: IPofServer1/32
    Destination: any (the Internet)
    NAT Address: publicIPofServer1

    Also remember to set up firewall rules on the DMZ network allowing access out. They only exist by default on LAN.

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