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

    default gateway packet loss - no system logs

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    18 Posts 4 Posters 1.5k 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.
    • M
      michmoor LAYER 8 Rebel Alliance @SteveITS
      last edited by

      @steveits Yeah meant to capture another alert.

      The alerts under Gateways

      387920d1-a233-4697-916e-74b8ca887737-image.png

      Alerts under general
      319777a1-7612-4325-91de-05ef3c82f567-image.png

      So whats not seen here is an alarm for my default gateway.

      Firewall: NetGate,Palo Alto-VM,Juniper SRX
      Routing: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
      Switching: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
      Wireless: Unifi, Aruba IAP
      JNCIP,CCNP Enterprise

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

        @michmoor said in default gateway packet loss - no system logs:

        So whats not seen here is an alarm for my default gateway.

        So if the monitoring is up and working, I would expect that there was not any outage.

        M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • M
          michmoor LAYER 8 Rebel Alliance @viragomann
          last edited by

          @viragomann said in default gateway packet loss - no system logs:

          So if the monitoring is up and working, I would expect that there was not any outage.

          Yeah thats the concern. Clients on the LAN saw a brief interruption and dpinger saw packetloss to other gateways. Definitely outside of the network. Just wondering why the default gateway didnt see anything. Perhaps its a timing thing. Recovery happened which was quick so the gateway threshold for failure was never reached.

          Firewall: NetGate,Palo Alto-VM,Juniper SRX
          Routing: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
          Switching: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
          Wireless: Unifi, Aruba IAP
          JNCIP,CCNP Enterprise

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • stephenw10S
            stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
            last edited by

            Seeing packet loss across a VPN but not on the WAN is not that unusual. I'm not seeing a problem here. Those VPN connections saw some packet loss. At different times. If there had been packet loss on the WAN it would have affected both the WAN monitoring and any VPNs using the WAN.
            Any clients that had traffic routed across those VPNs would have seen an interruption at that point.

            Steve

            M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • M
              michmoor LAYER 8 Rebel Alliance @stephenw10
              last edited by michmoor

              @stephenw10 said in default gateway packet loss - no system logs:

              Any clients that had traffic routed across those VPNs would have seen an interruption at that point.

              MS Teams is the main application that saw the interruption. Not routed over any VPN.
              It could have been just a coincidence that all VPN gateways saw a problem. Also likely that there was an upstream routing commonality that saw the drops and application issue.
              Either way, i agree with everyone's viewpoint here which is at the end of the day the WAN gateway with a monitor IP thats outside the ISPs infra, did not see a problem as indicated by the logs.

              EDIT: Ok something @SteveITS mentioned about thresholds..So i checked what the thresholds are for all my gateways as they are all configured the same.
              Packet Loss thresholds is set for default 10/20.
              Looking at the Interactive Graph for the WAN gateway, the packet loss at the time of the incident was at 3.25%
              The VPN gateways have a packet loss of 100% Thats the reason i believe why the VPN gateways alerted and the default gateway didnt.
              So yes there was definitely a path issue out on the internet.

              Firewall: NetGate,Palo Alto-VM,Juniper SRX
              Routing: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
              Switching: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
              Wireless: Unifi, Aruba IAP
              JNCIP,CCNP Enterprise

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • stephenw10S
                stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                last edited by

                Because those VPN interfaces have gateways defined pfSense sees them as WANs which means when they get marked down a bunch of scripts are run. Depending on exactly what's running on your firewall that can be an expensive operation for the CPU. You might see some interruption on other gateways if so.

                M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • M
                  michmoor LAYER 8 Rebel Alliance @stephenw10
                  last edited by

                  @stephenw10 I think you misunderstand me

                  Another viewpoint - Grafana

                  ffcb5d88-f332-4d68-97a0-f52f877e71be-image.png

                  All gateways saw a loss but i believe the threshold for failure was not met for the WAN_DHCP hence no alarms were generated in the system logs. The loss percentage was too low where as for the VPNs it was at a 100%

                  Firewall: NetGate,Palo Alto-VM,Juniper SRX
                  Routing: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
                  Switching: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
                  Wireless: Unifi, Aruba IAP
                  JNCIP,CCNP Enterprise

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • stephenw10S
                    stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                    last edited by

                    Ah OK, that could also be true. Depending on where you're monitoring the VPNs could well see greater packet loss at that time.

                    M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • M
                      michmoor LAYER 8 Rebel Alliance @stephenw10
                      last edited by

                      @stephenw10 any reason for more packet loss over a vpn then when not using one ?

                      Firewall: NetGate,Palo Alto-VM,Juniper SRX
                      Routing: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
                      Switching: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
                      Wireless: Unifi, Aruba IAP
                      JNCIP,CCNP Enterprise

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • stephenw10S
                        stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                        last edited by

                        Longer route, more hops. Generally more chances to lose packets.

                        1.1.1.1 is an anycast address so you see replies from whatever is logically closest to you.

                        Steve

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