• 0 Votes
    5 Posts
    801 Views
    U

    If it'll help, some further details about my setup, everything is connected by Unifi switches that are vlan capable, but not all of the ports are specifically configured to be on a vlan.

    I've been doing fping tests just to see what can be seen through a few different systems, and below is my findings.

    From a system that is connected to a port designated with vlan 3220 [10.32.2.0 network]:

    uquevedo@ubence-air-wired ~ % fping -ga 10.32.40.1 10.32.40.254 10.32.40.1 10.32.40.10

    From the VM itself that is configured with the bridge interface to vlan 3240:

    uquevedo@kea-testing:~$ fping -qga 10.32.40.1 10.32.40.254 10.32.40.1 10.32.40.10

    From a system that is connected to a port designated with vlan 3230 [10.32.3.0 network]:

    [uquevedo@fedora-system ~]$ fping -ga 10.32.40.1 10.32.40.254 10.32.40.1 10.32.40.10

    From the actual RHEL9.2 host system, which of course can ping the IP address:

    [uquevedo@rh-vm01 ~]$ fping -ga 10.32.40.1 10.32.40.254 10.32.40.1 10.32.40.9 10.32.40.10

    There are many bridged interfaces on the host system connecting to various vlan tagged interfaces:
    Screenshot 2023-05-17 at 7.13.36 AM.png

    The bridge0 interface is a non-vlan tagged interface [vlan1?] and is accessible to all systems on the network.

    I was under the assumption that if a network interface was tagged with vlan information that it would be accessible to other systems that are part of that same vlan?

    Another thing about my setup is that these vlans are configured on a pfSense box for lab purposes, they are not configured on my main pfSense box [which I don't think matters]. So even though the opt ports of this system are technically on their own network, they are connecting to my main network.

  • Bridging 4095

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    209 Views
    JKnottJ

    @senseivita

    You're not supposed to use 4095. It's reserved.

  • cheeky ACL for IPv6 multi-cast DNS help request

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    443 Views
    4

    @jknott i don't need to replace the tplinks. i can simply put an ipv6 ACL on the ports of the netgear that connect to it and my purpose is solved. My trouble is, i don't know what i need to put in the config screen i posted

  • Private LAN setup with Server NICs

    6
    0 Votes
    6 Posts
    865 Views
    ipeetablesI

    @tonydutt you're welcome!

  • Troubles with qinq

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    185 Views
    No one has replied
  • LACP trunking Vlans constantly increased I/O errors

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    346 Views
    B

    +++

    missing details:

    laggash on lacp vs tp link swicht (errored interface) is l2
    laggash on lacp vs edgerouter is l3+l4

  • Mikrotik Hotspot and Vlan

    6
    0 Votes
    6 Posts
    881 Views
    V

    @kanuns
    With the example configuration I gave above, pfSense can only get an IP in one of the VLANs.

    However, as of your description of the purpose it I'm wondering if you really need the VLANs to terminate on the Mikrotik.
    If not you can remove them from there and configure a simply transit network between the Mikrotik and pfSense. This could be tagged or not. Then route the VLANs to the pfSense IP.
    On pfSense you can configure the VLANs on the NIC for the AP.

    I think, this setup is easier and more reliable.

  • Installed intel 520 10g sfp+ card but no internet

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    266 Views
    B

    Are you positive the modules you're using in the X520 are coded for Intel part numbers? Most X520 cards will not pass traffic unless your optics are Intel coded. You might get link lights, but the driver won't bring the port online.

  • Virtual IP on QinQ interface

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    235 Views
    Z

    Did a bit more testing. Setup facing switch (qfx5100) to push/pop the stag so I could setup only one tag since it' worked on another interface. Unfortunately it doesn't work in this scenario either. The difference here is I see arp requests from pfsense on a tcpdump of the interface, nothing comes back from the far end. Primary interface ip works fine and BGP is up.

    Unsure of what to test next.

  • VLAN 1 Best Practices?

    13
    1 Votes
    13 Posts
    6k Views
    johnpozJ

    @uplink PVST+ and RPVST+ which are cisco and can be tagged..

    A native vlan is any untagged vlan, not just vlan 1.

    From one of the cert exam books for cisco

    "Although maintenance protocols such as Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP), Port Aggregation Protocol (PAgP), and Dynamic Trunking Protocol (DTP) normally are carried over the native VLAN of a trunk, they will not be affected if the native VLAN is removed or manually pruned from the trunk. They still will be sent and received on the native VLAN as a special case even if the native VLAN ID is not in the list of allowed VLANs."

    Any untagged frame is native.. If you want to take something away from that it should be this.

    " It is generally the best practice to keep that internal traffic isolated from data traffic."

    So put your switches and AP management on a vlan not used for normal user traffic.. This is sometimes called an infrastructure vlan. But then again you have to work with the functionality of your infrastructure devices.. But even if your devices have to be managed with untagged - you don't have to use that vlan for user traffic.. So yes it best to isolate management of your network from user traffic ;)

    But here is the thing - you can not really disable untagged traffic like that from being sent, you can keep it from being passed on, etc.. Here I have a dummy vlan 10, the vlan is disabled - it doesn't go anywhere.. I set the native vlan, because you can not really remove it from a port, cisco doesn't let you.. If you remove native vlan from a trunk in cisco it will just send it out what default vlan you have set on the switch.. which will be "untagged"

    sniff.jpg

    that is sniff on pfsense on a port connected to switch interface that is in trunk, where native is set to a disabled vlan, notice still see stp and cdp traffic on this port..

    If your worried about someone plugging into a port, again the best thing to do is disable and put into a vlan not using, like my vlan 10, But if the port is active and you have cdp or stp enabled - there will be that traffic on that port untagged..

    Your causing yourself added config and and work for no real good reason.. And again any port connected to a device is going to be native, ie untagged in some vlan be it the default vlan 1, or some other vlan you put that port in. Even if you told all your devices to do tags, iot devices, printers etc are unlikely to be able to do that, etc. And even if you setup a port to only be tagged, info like stp and cdp is still going to go out that port..

    depending on your switch, you may be able to disable stp on specific ports, or stuff like cdp or lldp (non cisco kind of cdp).. But most lower end smart switches are not going to be able to do that, etc.

  • Replacing old Cisco ASA w/new Netgate trouble

    6
    0 Votes
    6 Posts
    785 Views
    G

    @marvosa Thanks again for your help. It is now working. It was at least the firewall rules issue ("LAN net" didn't cut it), and adding rules for each subnet was the final piece. I also went through and added the individual subnets in the outbound NAT rules. Between those two changes - we have access on all subnets.

  • 0 Votes
    6 Posts
    747 Views
    R

    @noechoreply said in New setup with 2100: Can't ping connected Cisco switch or any of it's devices:

    I do not have the definite explanation to why it's like that.

    Stated in many threads on the forum and in the documentation:

    port 5 is the IC in the 2100 and it has to be tagged for the VLANs to be seen in the pfSense side of the hardware. The switch is not directly tied to pfSense and has to be linked through, using port 5.

    Step 19 here:
    https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/solutions/netgate-2100/configuring-the-switch-ports.html

    87171335-f2cb-45a2-85d9-a79f632aa626-image.png

  • I neet config SIP CANTV, help me.

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    141 Views
    No one has replied
  • Add VLAN to working system

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    194 Views
    No one has replied
  • Switch VLAN's cant be set

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    259 Views
    S

    @idlekite If you have a backup, restoring would work. Or restoring from the config history.

    https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/backup/restore.html

  • Assit with tagged vs untagged VLAN TPlink switch

    6
    0 Votes
    6 Posts
    984 Views
    JKnottJ

    @imv8n said in Assit with tagged vs untagged VLAN TPlink switch:

    TPLINK TL-SG108E

    Be careful. Some TP-Link switches don't handle VLANs properly. I believe this is one, though it may have been fixed by now.

  • VLAN creation and internet service denial for clients

    6
    0 Votes
    6 Posts
    363 Views
    I

    @johnpoz
    Probably, but only that seemed to work though....no other changes made and nothing worked until the restart. Probably a restart of a specific service could do it as well. Bug or not , my pfsense doesn t seem to work not only for vlans but for Firewall rules as well. I created a rule in order for the vlan not to be able to access the lan and didn t work. I restarted the laptop, still nothing , restarted the router still nothing, restarted pfsense and guess what,....

    It is not like spreading false/wrong info but if anyone else is having similar kind of problems it would be nice to know one extra thing to try out.

  • Codel limiters with vlans

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    525 Views
    No one has replied
  • 2100 Can't ping firewall on second VLAN

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    349 Views
    F

    It was an IPsec VPN!
    If the near and far networks overlap then traffic heading for the firewall IP needs to bypass the VPN.
    That's normally sorted out by the 'Enable bypass for LAN interface IP' setting with is on by default.
    However, that only handles the lan interface and not any other lan-type interfaces which get created.
    The fix was to add an 'Additional IPsec bypass' rule.
    I'm not sure if this is a bug or not.
    Should there be a list of interfaces to bypass rather than just the lan interface being special?

    Cheers,
    Scott

  • VLAN won't connect to internet

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    165 Views
    No one has replied
Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.