@derelict Thank you for pointing us in the right direction. Eventually found in the switch a different ARP the in the pfsense. Eventually followed those issue around in the network and solved the issue. Thank you for the advice.

Two things that I forgot to mention are that I already have OpenVPN set up successfully for my normal network and that since I'm new to the pfSense concept, I've never worked with VLANs on it before. I do, however, understand the VLAN broad concept since I've taken a Principles of Networking class as a computer systems administration student at my university.

Thank you for pointing me in the right direction, I am brand new to pfsense. I wasn't expecting the SG-3100 to have it's built in little switch. I am finding conflicting information regarding the SG-3100 being able to support LACP on a LAGG. This post indicates the SG-3100 seems to not support LACP https://forum.netgate.com/topic/131207/lagg-on-switched-ports-on-sg-3100 and this Netgate article has LACP described for the SG-3100 has LACP listed as a protocol for the SG-3100. I am still have difficulty created a 2 port LAG to a Cisco switch using LACP and trunking multiple VLANs over it. Has anyone here been successful at this? Thank you.

Now if only I could edit the topic, I could change it to solved!

@jknott thanks for your help, finely i got it to work, i needed to add the VLAN to the switch and then tag the ports i want to transfer the VLAN with

@johnsed said in VLAN over openvpn: so I have 11 vpns on each router Certainly not how I would do it. I'd have a central site feeding all of those. I would have redundancy at the central site so no one failure took everything down. That site would route between the "spokes." Everything necessary to all of the "spokes" would be accessible via the central site. They way you have done it is take the number of sites you have and the number of problems that might ring your phone is sites^2 instead of sites/2.

Did you put a gateway on your vlan 5 rules? This is common mistake where users set a gateway on the rule, this forces traffic out that gateway vs allowing pfsense to use it routing table. Post up your rule(s) you put on vlan 5 interface Blocking rfc1918 on the interface have seen as well.

Hello Completely true, IP duplicated in the LAN segment. Thank you so much.

Ah, well then it shouldn't be required through the edge router either. Just a matter of getting it to pass the traffic. Steve

@sccmadmin said in Camera VLAN Configuration: The DVR will need to have access to both VLANs to access the cameras and to be accessed from user computers to login to web interface to view the camera feed/recordings. How can I accomplish this? That is called routing.. And yes that is how any device in vlan X gets access to devices not on vlan X.. Be they are vlan (tagged) or just different physical networks. That is what pfsense does out of the box. You can set the rules to be any any on both networks/vlans or you can restrict traffic to the specific ports needed. I would NOT recommend dual homing your DVR.. Unless your going to isolate all your camera's behind the DVR itself on different vlan that doesn't even have to touch pfsense. And then another nic on the DVR will give the DVR access to the rest of your network, etc.

What needs to be done is all the vlans that you want on the downstream switch need to be tagged and allowed on the port that connects the switches on both switches.. Cisco calls that a trunk port yes. edit: BTW moving this to the L2 section.

Create a LAGG on pfsense and on the switch stack. Use the LAGG as the vlan parent.

If your talking about changing the vlan interface mac addresses, you can’t you need to change the mac on the parent interface.

@johnpoz said in Setting up a Vlan for security,: You should never be suggesting to someone that they can get by with using a dumb switch if they want to start using vlans. What about my original intention for using a VLAN. I have an access point that supports multiple SSIDs and I was planning on setting up a guest SSID & VLAN. It was the only device on my network, other than pfSense, that would use a VLAN. Was I supposed to toss a perfectly good Cisco unmanaged switch, just because I was running a VLAN to one device? However, I definitely recommend VLANs for security cameras, VoIP phones, etc.. In some cases, it makes sense to use a managed switch to keep LAN and VLAN separate. In others, maybe not. An example would be a network where most devices are VoIP phones, with computers plugged into the phones. (I've seen networks where there's nothing else other than VoIP phones & computers and the Internet connection) In that situation, what advantage would a managed switch provide? Due to the way switches filter traffic, there would be very few VLAN frame appearing at devices not configured for a VLAN. As always, look at the requirements and be guided accordingly. That said, there's not much reason to not buy a managed switch these days. BTW, my plan failed because our favorite manufacturer, TP-Link, didn't know how to handle VLANs properly. Me and jknott bang heads about this all the time. And you have horns on yours!

That ifconfig indicates LACP isn't even set on that lagg.

Hello, I'm using version 2.4.4

@derelict Hmmm...I'm not sure there is a way to assign a virtual NIC for a Hyper-V VM to an untagged VLAN. I had added a VLAN during pfSense initial config, to match the virtual NIC and physical switch port configs. The general ease of virtualization lured me into forgetting the requirement for VLAN support at the NIC hardware/driver level. Broadcom docs indicate Netlink 57XX series don't have VLAN support. My onboard NIC is a Broadcom Netlink BCM57780. I ended up adding a multi-port PCI-E NIC (removed the bracket so it would fit my low profile Optiplex 380), connecting a second port between Hyper-V host and switch (untagged/PVID VLAN 100) for VLAN, and reconfigured switch, virtual NIC and pfSense interfaces accordingly. Success. Though for me it defeats the purpose of a VLAN in the first place. The switch, modem and Hyper-V host (pfSense) are all in close proximity, so I can simply connect the modem to the second port on the Hyper-V host. But I never used a modem connected to a switch port instead of directly to my router, and was curious whether it would work as expected. Your response got me thinking in the right direction. Thank you!

@teamits yeah. It should just work. It doesn't tho... And it's really messing up my holiday giving spirit. I should've just did it all myself. No outside vendor. Sigh.

Then start following the manual: https://www.netgate.com/docs/pfsense/routing/connectivity-troubleshooting.html and if this isn't enough capture packets on both sides to see where it fails. Btw. if you really want to use VLANs get managed switches, unmanaged switches can strip/mess up VLAN tags.

There is a second VLAN id field hidden under the adavnced option for each Wifi network profile. Correcting that allowed me to ping across the waps to the firewall but still no internet. I need to reserach more about the Netgear WAPs tagged/untagged network option and then will retry next year. Thanks for the suggestions.