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

    Help on load balancing arplookup 210.213.215.254 failed: host is not on local ne

    Routing and Multi WAN
    11
    48
    24.2k
    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.
    • H
      hoba
      last edited by

      I guess gateway and interface IP is the same and it is a /32, right?

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • C
        cheeky
        last edited by

        WAN IP is 210.213.171.2xx subnet 255.255.255.255
        Gateway IP 210.213.170.x

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • H
          hoba
          last edited by

          Ok, I guess the code is too smart to accept a /32 and a gateway outside this subnet atm. Time to revisit it  ;)

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • C
            cheeky
            last edited by

            Any update on this problem? Have this been resolved by the new snapshots?
            Thank you very much.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • D
              databeestje
              last edited by

              please give me the output from the routing table from Diag -> Routes.

              I also require the relevant rules from your rules.debug.
              using the command page execute the following.
              grep route-to /tmp/rules.debug

              I do not have a working pppoe test rig so I'm working in the dark here.
              Are you willing to provide me access to the box?
              I also commited another load balancer fix this evening. Check if that one outputs any messages.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • C
                cheeky
                last edited by

                I'll try loading the new snapshot later, i'm currently using now the original 1.0.1 iso. So far no problem on my load balancer using PPPoe on WAN but no failover.
                I'll post my results immediately.
                Yes, i'm willing to open my pfsense firewall for you to debug inside.
                Thanks.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • dotdashD
                  dotdash
                  last edited by

                  I am also having this problem. If it helps any, here is some data on my setup:
                  lan=fxp0
                  wan=fxp1  (pppoe)
                  opt1=fxp2 (WAN2 static IP)

                  wan 100.200.200.110
                  subnet mask 255.255.255.255
                  gateway 100.200.200.254

                  1.0.1 release
                  worked fine, but ISP turned off ICMP on the next-hop router.
                  Started monitoring the dns server, but it frequently timed-out and went offline.

                  Updated using
                  pfSense-Full-Update-1.0.1-SNAPSHOT-02-14-2007.tgz
                  Deleted and re-configured balancer.
                  Started getting messages in system log and no traffic was going out WAN
                  kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate route for 100.200.200.254
                  kernel: arplookup 100.200.200.254 failed: host is not on local network

                  updated to
                  pfSense-Full-Update-1.0.1-SNAPSHOT-02-18-2007.tgz
                  Slightly diffferent messages in log

                  kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate route for 100.200.200.254
                  kernel: arplookup 100.200.200.254 failed: could not allocate llinfo
                  kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate route for 192.0.2.113
                  kernel: arplookup 192.0.2.113 failed: host is not on local network

                  For now, I have pulled the WAN from the balancer pool
                  (only has opt1)
                  The default gateway for my LAN is still the balancer.
                  I CAN however, create a rule for a specific IP pointing to gateway default
                  and send that machine out the WAN.

                  Here is a partial dump of the current routing table
                  Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Mtu Netif Expire
                  default   100.200.200.254 UGS 0 45115 1492 ng0
                  100.200.200.110      lo0   UHS   0   0   16384    lo0
                  100.200.200.254      100.200.200.110        UH     1     105      1492    ng0

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • dotdashD
                    dotdash
                    last edited by

                    Just got a chance to try with 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT-02-27-2007 (via update firmware)
                    Still getting 'host is not on local network' error.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • H
                      hoba
                      last edited by

                      We are missing a testbed to fix this bug atm. We'll work on it soon. Stay tuned.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • S
                        sai
                        last edited by

                        dotdash

                        @dotdash:

                        wan 100.200.200.110
                        subnet mask 255.255.255.255
                        gateway 100.200.200.254

                        Its a bit early in the morning here, but your subnet mask looks way wrong. The WAN and its gateway should be on the same subnet, and so the arplookup error seems to be reasonable. Try a subnet of 255.255.255.0

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • H
                          hoba
                          last edited by

                          @sai:

                          dotdash

                          @dotdash:

                          wan 100.200.200.110
                          subnet mask 255.255.255.255
                          gateway 100.200.200.254

                          Its a bit early in the morning here, but your subnet mask looks way wrong. The WAN and its gateway should be on the same subnet, so try a subnet of 255.255.255.0

                          No, pppoe just works this way.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • C
                            cheeky
                            last edited by

                            @hoba
                            Still waiting for the final resolution to this problem, i'm still using now the original 1.0.1 with no problem.
                            Thank you very much.
                            :D ;D ::)

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • N
                              ndelong
                              last edited by

                              If it helps, I'm in a similar situation (fail-over not working due to arp messages):

                              WAN1: PPPoE w/"static" DHCP /32
                              WAN2: Static

                              Running 1.0.1-SNAPSHOT-03-08-2007

                              Getting these messages:

                              
                              kernel: arplookup 204.213.240.xxx failed: host is not on local network
                              kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate route for 204.213.240.xxx
                              
                              

                              Anything I can do to help? Send logs, etc?

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • S
                                sullrich
                                last edited by

                                Try adding static routes for these hosts or check the routing table to ensure they are correct.

                                netstat -rn

                                Also I recall LB not working with pppoe but I could be wrong here.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • D
                                  databeestje
                                  last edited by

                                  that would be a yes
                                  I think we add a route for the gateway on the underlying interface instead of the ng0 device.

                                  Which would result in this iirc.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • N
                                    ndelong
                                    last edited by

                                    Our firewall started off with PPPoE on the WAN interface connected to an old Westel modem. We added a cable connection w/static IP months later and are currently testing LB/FO. Both connections work fine independently of each other - even with the load balancing pools created. As soon as we create any rules on the LAN interface that reference the LB or FO gateways, we get intermittent connectivity and those arp messages. Unfortunately, I'm not on that customer's site, so my netstat -rn is shows the routes with LB/FO rules disabled:

                                    
                                    Destination        Gateway            Flags    Refs      Use  Netif Expire
                                    default            204.213.240.129    UGS         0  7510236    ng0
                                    74.92.60.116/30    link#4             UC          0        0    em3
                                    74.92.60.118       00:13:f7:22:ae:b0  UHLW        1   432194    em3   1043
                                    127.0.0.1          127.0.0.1          UH          0        0    lo0
                                    192.168.1          link#3             UC          0     3236    em2
                                    204.213.240.253    lo0                UHS         0        0    lo0
                                    
                                    

                                    Would a temporary workaround be to connect the Westel modem to a Linksys router (to handle the PPPoE) and configure static RFC1918 IP's between the pfSense box and the Linksys?

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • dotdashD
                                      dotdash
                                      last edited by

                                      A similar situation was discussed here: http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,4100.0.html
                                      Quick summary:
                                      You could use 1.0.1 release and PPPoE on pfSense's WAN.
                                      You could double nat, but that sucks.
                                      If you have multiple publics (static block), have a router (another pfSense with LAN bridged to WAN??) do the PPPoE and configure pfSense with a straight public IP.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • D
                                        databeestje
                                        last edited by

                                        Setup a modem with pppoe bridging so you can just use dhcp or static with a public ip on the pfsense box.

                                        Still have not found time to troubleshoot this.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • N
                                          ndelong
                                          last edited by

                                          My main issue with reverting back to straight 1.0.1 is that the traffic I need to handle requires FO rather than LB. The traffic is such that if the recipient detects even one packet coming from a different source IP, they'll can the entire connection.

                                          At a different site I have a Westell 6100 modem/router that appears to handle the pppoe & pass the static info on to the pfsense box. I'm going to see if I can replicate that configuration at this particular site.

                                          databeestje - If you don't have time to troubleshoot, keep tossing ideas my way & I'll do my best to see what information I can gather for you. It would be awesome if we can get native PPPoE + Cable LB/FO working - poorman's enterprise!

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • D
                                            databeestje
                                            last edited by

                                            as of 22-03-2007 pppoe is still not supported/fixed.

                                            Considering my vacation next week this is unlikely to change soon.

                                            You can however use the old style configuration as a workaround. e.g. Not the interface name, but the gateway address. This requires manual config mangling and a filter reload.
                                            so replace "wan" with you wan gateway IP in the relevant config section, etc. Please confirm that works with a pppoe connection before we troubleshoot this any further.

                                            e.g. edit file config.xml, search for the load balancer section. Gateway goes left, monitor ip goes right.
                                            Save that, reboot, see if it works.

                                            Old style configuration will trigger some logging warnings though.

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