Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    NTP woes

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    33 Posts 7 Posters 3.0k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • F
      furom @Bob.Dig
      last edited by

      @bob-dig said in NTP woes:

      a.PNG

      Thanks! I get the first two lines, but what is the third used for?

      Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • Bob.DigB
        Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @furom
        last edited by Bob.Dig

        @furom said in NTP woes:

        I get the first two lines, but what is the third used for?

        It is not needed here but if the host is already connecting to the firewall, then this is allowed and I don't have to make the rule on that interface.

        Now, that I am thinking about it, my solution to not redirect traffic already going to the firewall isn't that great to look at, probably should redirect everything.

        F V 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • F
          furom @Bob.Dig
          last edited by

          @bob-dig Thanks for explaining, and well, it helped me... :)

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • F
            furom
            last edited by

            But... With this NTP redirect rule in place, should I still need to allow each network access to the NTP server?? I thought this was that setup, or have I managed to get something wrong...

            It works, I now see the pfSense IP instead of a pool one for NTP, but, is this expected?

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • V
              viragomann @Bob.Dig
              last edited by

              @bob-dig said in NTP woes:

              I get the first two lines, but what is the third used for?

              It is not needed here but if the host is already connecting to the firewall, then this is allowed and I don't have to make the rule on that interface.

              I'd say, the third one is all you really need.
              It covers all interface assigned addresses as well as localhost. And since you don't redirect interface IPs, you need all of them.
              But you can spare the first two rules, since the third covers also both protocols, IPv4 and v6.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
              • F
                furom
                last edited by

                Interesting... It seemed to be working, then I renamed the interface group, and while the config looks ok (reflects the new name), it now tries to get NTP from all over the place again...

                V 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • V
                  viragomann @furom
                  last edited by

                  @furom said in NTP woes:

                  it now tries to get NTP from all over the place again...

                  Your internal devices?

                  They will not notice the redirection. When devices tries to request e.g. 1.1.1.1 and pfSense redirects it to itself, it sends response packets back with 1.1.1.1 as source address. Hence the device will think, it's all right, the server is responding as expected.

                  You can check the states for outbound NTP connections to see if your rules are working.

                  F 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • F
                    furom @viragomann
                    last edited by

                    @viragomann said in NTP woes:

                    @furom said in NTP woes:

                    it now tries to get NTP from all over the place again...

                    Your internal devices?

                    Yes, they are trying to get NTP from WAN addresses again... I have not yet enabled the NTP server of pfSense, but anyhow, they should try NTP from pfSenseIP:123, right?

                    V 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • V
                      viragomann @furom
                      last edited by

                      @furom said in NTP woes:

                      Yes, they are trying to get NTP from WAN addresses again... I have not yet enabled the NTP server of pfSense

                      Why not? I assumed, that's your goal here.

                      they should try NTP from pfSenseIP:123, right?

                      This is expected on an DHCP-enabled device, when it pulls the IP from pfSense and you have the NTP server enabled.

                      But as stated here in this thread, some devices doesn't obey the NTP settings provided by DHCP anyway.
                      For these we redirect the NTP requests to pfSense. And if the device requests for instance time.google.com 216.239.35.8:123, pfSense responses with exactly this IP.

                      F 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • Bob.DigB
                        Bob.Dig LAYER 8
                        last edited by

                        I changed my rules to be more slick. I am now redirecting everything.

                        a.PNG

                        b.PNG

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • F
                          furom @viragomann
                          last edited by

                          @viragomann Oh. My bad then. I thought the logs would show pfSense was serving the time. Time to enjoy this now, thanks a lot for the help!

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • JKnottJ
                            JKnott @furom
                            last edited by

                            @furom said in NTP woes:

                            Oh! Will read some. I thought "stratum" was when you had your own GPS. Thanks for the link! :)

                            You might also want to read about International Atomic Time, which NTP is supposed to be traceable to. I provided a Wikipedia link earlier.

                            PfSense running on Qotom mini PC
                            i5 CPU, 4 GB memory, 32 GB SSD & 4 Intel Gb Ethernet ports.
                            UniFi AC-Lite access point

                            I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...

                            F 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • F
                              furom @JKnott
                              last edited by

                              @jknott said in NTP woes:

                              @furom said in NTP woes:

                              Oh! Will read some. I thought "stratum" was when you had your own GPS. Thanks for the link! :)

                              You might also want to read about International Atomic Time, which NTP is supposed to be traceable to. I provided a Wikipedia link earlier.

                              Thanks! I will have a look at that too. :)

                              JKnottJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • JKnottJ
                                JKnott @furom
                                last edited by

                                @furom said in NTP woes:

                                Thanks! I will have a look at that too. :)

                                When you have time. 😉

                                PfSense running on Qotom mini PC
                                i5 CPU, 4 GB memory, 32 GB SSD & 4 Intel Gb Ethernet ports.
                                UniFi AC-Lite access point

                                I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • First post
                                  Last post
                                Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.