@jbarbanera
You can remove the nat 1:1 rule. That is not the use case, it is meant for.

Check if the network settings are correct on both machines.

Is pfSense the default gateway on both. I assume it isn't at least on the WAN computer.
If it isn't add a static route to it for the other network behind pfSense and point it to pfSense IP.

👻 Yeah, that could be the issue. I have heard from users to stay away from Realtek NICs. I made sure that I got a used 4-port Intel NIC, less than $20 from eBay, which has been working flawlessly under pfSense when I built my pfSense box two years ago. 👻

@johnpoz said in allowing roku discovery across VLANs:

full byte

HA!

@jaaasshh Did you ever figure this out? I know this breaks @johnpoz's heart but I'm trying to do the same.

@jarhead And when you do there's no need to redact interface names or internal MAC addresses... public IPs, FQDNs, usernames? Sure.

@uquevedo Groovy. Glad it worked

I should also mention, the DMZ network we are trying to setup is a routed network. The ISP has a static route pointed at our firewall with this particular network.

@wifi-will

I'm not certain how your hotels would be much different than that seniors residence I mentioned. It had a router and 4 24 port switches, with the switches spread among 3 towers and the office. It also had a lot of WiFi and ADSL to the rooms. Each room also had it's own router.

That's the thing. I've had suricata running on the system with just the three physical interfaces for a while now with no problems, but once I got around to moving the tunnel so I could make use of suricata, things started getting weird.

Right now, I'm suspecting that it's going to come down more to a combo of pfsense/suricata not liking the use of tagged vlans with my particular configuration (I did see netmap_ring_reinit igb3, which happens to be the parent for the vlan at one point, causing traffic to stop flowing until the system was restarted, with a full reset to POST at the worst case).

This was partially me derping any not expecting inline mode to inspect the tagged packets, which I should have, and partially it apparently blocking the neighbor solicitation packets, which was totally unexpected, and resolved by disabling it on the parent interface.

I'm not totally adverse to moving the parent interfaces around, or moving the tagged vlan to something port based on the switch, which may also lead to cleaning up some, ahem, 'technical debt' in the layout of the local network space.

Regardless, I reserve the right to change my opinion as I look into this more. 🙂 At this time, things are stable and the public facing server IP's are receiving traffic as expected.

@ydyw8rdm8i7dfd

Just note that when you set switchport mode trunk , it will "default" allow all Vlans on the trunk.

If you feel for it you could do a further restriction :

Remember the "add" on allow , else you will be sorry 😊

/Bingo

@dominikhoffmann There is a lot of nonsense on the internet - that video seems like one of those.. No you would not bridge 2 interfaces on the router and plug them into the same switch.. You just created a LOOP..

You can somewhat try to simulate a switch port with 2 interfaces and creating a bridge that you would connect devices into, or 2 dfifferent switches..

But a bridge is not the same as a switch port - if you want/need more ports than use a switch..

@treefrog

Assign the vlan to an interface, create your firewall rules. Then you can move lan to the interface.

But yeah @viragomann is correct if you plugged the pc directly into the pfsense interface you would had to set the PC to do tagging?

Out of curiosity why do you want your lan tagged?

@natethegreat21 you can for sure block specific as you have done. But as mentioned its easier to just create an alias that either contains your specific networks, or just all the rfc1918 networks.

You could create an alias with your full prefix for your IPv6 space. Problem with dynamic ipv6 is that could change - which is one of the reasons I prefer tunnel from HE, I get a /48 to do with what I will and it doesn't change.

@dominikhoffmann You can skip the port assignment (that only shows you up/down status in the GUI) and do the PVID assignments -- which was likely all you were really missing.

@chris1284 said in How to start with VLANs:

where i also connect the modem link on a port with VLAN 7 (needed for T-Com)

Yes, it's nothing more than a tagged VLAN port, no PVID needed on this port.

@rcoleman-netgate said in Moving LAN port icg0 to another physical interface:

@kiwinia I make a new interface that allows you to access the GUI.

Then I change the interface.

Always have a backup port.

@rcoleman-netgate, Thanks, yes I just did that and confirmed I could get to the GUI from there, that makes me feel more comfortable.

I need to get familiar with the console also, in case I need it in the future.

Thanks to everyone who responded

@gjaltemba said in Help with routing problem on L3 switch:

It was a static route that I needed

Yeah you have to tell pfsense how to get to the downstream networks for sure ;)

@hudri said in Assigning Clients to VLANs:

where they just manually switched back and forth between the VLANs,

You can - where you set the pc to understand the tag, but again that is not a vlan... That is some user without a clue to networking thinking they have setup a vlan and all they did is run multiple IP schemes on the same network. There is no actual security there, anything can talk to anything, be it you setup a firewall rule or not - broadcast and multicast traffic is going to be seen by every device.

That is not a vlan. A vlan actually isolates traffic at layer 2..

You could move your pc into another vlan that is on that port, by changing the pvid on trunk port so the untagged traffic is now in X vs Y, etc. But just changing on the IP on the pc isn't going to work if you actually have vlans setup.