you ran out of /24 Ips - ok then how about a /23 or /22 ;) The jump from /24 to /16 is nuts. You use that as your mask on your devices or you just using it as a routing summary? To be honest that is not here or there to be honest - but it one of my trigger points is all ;) Insanely huge networks used for no valid reason. The only thing you need to do is fire up another instance.. The details of which are up to you, the really the only thing needs to change is has to be an actual different instance.. so another port say 1195, and use say 10.0.183.0/24 as the tunnel network. Then create your rules in your openvpn interface for 10.0.182 and 10.0.183 that limit or allow what you want those clients to be able to do.

There is no way to get v3 with the config built in yet. You can export an inline config and then import that into whatever and it should work. But none of us here have tried builds of v3 yet. It's still too early.

Thanks

I had a play with this over the weekend and i tried running some ping tests. I pinged machine b while remote desktop to machine b on site b from site c. I had no ping drops but the remote desktop connection did drop so i have a feeling this isn't a VPN issue, it might be more of an issue with FRR / routing. Any help how i can debug FRR? (and how can i change this post to that forum?)

so sad! thanks!

@s0p4l1n said in Issue with VPN Bandwidth, even with scaling: 100% of the bandwidth because they are loading high quality image We have several radio stations, ergo we had the same problem with transmitting raw uncut *.WAV audio files. We then deployed the Cisco UCS and its performance is satisfactory. Good luck with your work

@pippin Thanks a ton ! It definetly looks like it !

Thank you dotdash and bingo600. I was able to change the login name

Yeah - freaking covid! And while I will be in the EU in 2022.. Unless things go south again, not correct time of year for oktoberfest - and not in Germany.. The amount of trips planned and then cancelled to DE is just heart breaking. Always seem to miss it when in EU.. Belgium, France, Luxembourg, Spain, Italy.. Just can never seem to get to DE.. :(

@cdunbar No news from netgate. In my case, I can not manage the situation with a manual restart of OpenVPN service. As a workaround, I've created an adhoc OpenVPN virtual machine (based on Debian) on my private network with NAT & routing settings on the pfSense firewall. It's too bad and more complicated, but I had no choice.

@viragomann, My Lord! It works now.Added 10.1.5.0/24 to each "remote networks" configuration. I appreciate that. Thanks a lot. [image: 1623056867069-%D1%81%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%88%D0%BE%D1%82-07-06-2021-12.07.06.png]

@cmos_battery said in Unable to connect: I port forwarded the OpenVPN 1194 UDP port to the IP address of my WAN connection on the pfSense box At that moment, when you try to connect to your WAN IP, using port 1149 protocol UDP? you see the counter is going upwards. You'll know the NAT of the device in front of pfSense is set up correctly. [image: 1623043167872-577ebd43-997e-4452-9f48-41fc9ceddadb-image.png] For a basic OpenVPN set up, see the recent and less recent video's here.

@kom Never mind on my last post, I didn't realize that the Allow Compression settings disappear with the refuse setting you recommended is set. I'll give that a try. Thanks!

@nogbadthebad Yep thats what it needed, god damit :( looked over it so often

@viragomann hi, ivt is already configured, however, the local network cannot communicate with the remote network, only the firewall can communicate. It worked after adding the route [image: 1622735188473-45365c70-f55e-433c-938a-a5abef8b1251-image.png] No route: ping pfSense A to Host B: ok ping Host A to Host B: failed [image: 1622735631942-69cf9b74-f170-4c44-b7c2-9f5ca3426732-image.png] With route: ping pfSense A to Host B: ok ping Host A to Host B: ok [image: 1622735826630-cb394d7c-33b7-4ffd-8740-0c554c772483-image.png]

@bingo600 what are you talking about? I know it goes down, because the VPN stops working? The VPN stops working immediately. What does unbound or any other service have to do with pinging a router over a VPN?

@spudnet The real solution would be to bite the bullet and renumber one of the networks which is no small undertaking. Such a bizarre decision to make both a /8 unless they really do need to have 16 million clients on the same network.