@protar Nope, nothing to do with Android. the pfSense is a OpenVPN client to a few servers. It was indeed a DNS issue then getting stuck in a routing or nat loop. I'm still looking into ways to delay the other vpn connections to start so that I can use my internal DNS server that utilizes the first VPN connection outbound.

Thanks.

@maverick_slo said in How to block access from roadwarriors: @unaibg You can totally do it with rules and client overides. Assign static IP to that client, and make rules that fit your situation. Its just as secure as separate tunnel.. IF rules are smart designed of course I assign clients specific IP addresses via Freeradius. "ipsec-test" Cleartext-Password := "PASSWORD-WAS-HERE", Simultaneous-Use := "1", Expiration := "Jan 01 2020", NAS-Identifier == strongSwan Framed-IP-Address = 172.16.8.254, Framed-IP-Netmask = 255.255.255.0, Framed-Route = "0.0.0.0/0 172.16.8.1 1"

Yes. Fairly advanced OpenVPN concept though. You have to assign an interface to the OpenVPN client instance at Site A and be sure that the port-forwarded traffic does not match the firewall rules on the Site A side's OpenVPN tab and only matches a firewall rule on the assigned interface tab at Site A. This gets reply-to working there preventing the reply traffic from the port-forward target host from being routed out the default gateway at Site A and routing back through the tunnel instead. I am not certain this specific use case was covered but you might do well to watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ku-fNfJJV7w

@philw Thanks. I also currently have a fully working OpenWRT (LEDE) setup. This does the job very well. But, there are certain little things that can be annoying (for me at least). So I am wanting to replicate all my existing LEDE setttings with pfsense and will be comparing which I like better.

After setting this up, and installed this router in the remote side, after several days of testing I notice that there was a 50% decrease on internet speed, so I had to route just the traffic for my primary side, and leaving the remote side with his own uplink for internet. From primary side to secundary, there is a distance of 30kms, and both have uplinks of 100/100 Mbps. Here is the issue described: https://forum.netgate.com/topic/133011/solved-loss-of-internet-speed-while-on-vpn-from-site-to-site

So I had changed IPv4 remote network at remote side, just to route my primary side network, to avoid this situation. I have also tested crypto accelerators in both sides but didnt had any change.

Thanks for the reply, after few hours someone else mentioned that /24 sometimes wont work so adding /30 did the trick Thanks again

So you link to some openvpn installer script?? That has zero to do with pfsense.. Then you come back 5 days later and say fixed. Completely pointless!!

Yes. You have to configure the vpn routes and firewall rules on all firewalls must allow the access. Assuming there is a pfSense3 in front of office3 and the vpn connections are stie-to-site and the routes between 1-2 and 3-4 are already working, on pfsense1 add the office3 lan to the "remote networks" in the openvpn config and on pfsense3 add the office1 lan to the "remote networks". Both endpoints, pfsense1 and 3 have to be the default gateways in the lans.

oooh ok and here I been using the windows vista and later as it said windows... ill give it a try and let you know when I get home I really appreciate it

DNS not working. I can't access webpages. :( Tired, going to bed and will resume tomorrow.

@jimp said in packet HMAC authentication failed on peer-to-peer (shared key): Are you certain both systems are using the exact same shared key? That's the easiest way to get that error. I'm waiting to get the file from the client, but last time I checked (2 weeks ago when we first brought it online) they were the same. EDIT: Checked and both are identical.

I understand your testing of rfc1918 as "internet" I even stated such.. I am not complicating anything... You put up a drawing with client rfc1918 --- internet --- made up public IP.. How are they suppose to talk to each other if on the same L2? Yes if your test shows you can connected through your router to pfsense, then yes if you put actual public IP on it - you should be able to get to it from the internet.

You probably can't afford me.. :) This is actually pretty simple after you get the actual tunnel up.. First- IPv4 Remote network(s) Box 1 LAN 192.168.10.0/24 use 192.168.20.0/24 for this option Box 2 LAN 192.168.20.0/24 use 192.168.10.0/24 for this option Go to (yourpfsenseip)/firewall_rules.php?if=openvpn What do your firewall rules look like?

It sounds like your pfSense machine is behind another router, because as you state, 192.168.2.2 is a non-routable RFC1918 address. Assuming you have access to the router in front of it, you'd need to use its public WAN IP instead, and configure appropriate port forwarding to the pfSense machine.

@biggsy thank you very very much

Yes it is always better to have pfsense wan right on the public vs behind a NAT. But in the export util just set what your public is or what some fqdn points to your public is. [image: 1531826139641-vpnexportname-resized.png]