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

    Two PFsense systems cannot NAT

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved NAT
    17 Posts 2 Posters 7.6k 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.
    • GruensFroeschliG Offline
      GruensFroeschli
      last edited by

      again:

      |–-----|                        |--------|
      -- WAN --|  PF1  |--LAN------LAN--|  PF2    | -- WIFI
                    |-------|                        |--------|
                        |                                    |
                      DMZ                                WIFI

      Where is the WAN on your pfSense 2?
      If your "LAN" is the WAN then it will not work.

      We do what we must, because we can.

      Asking questions the smart way: http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • H Offline
        hansru
        last edited by

        Ok, the chart should look like this:

        |–-----|                        |--------|
        -- WAN --|  PF1  |--LAN------WAN*-|  PF2    | -- WIFI
                      |-------|                        |--------|
                          |                                    |
                        DMZ                                WIFI

        *Wan is 192.168.1.150 (also shown in the images)

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • H Offline
          hansru
          last edited by

          Is there anyone with a good idea how i can NAT two PfSense systems ?
          I can ping both back and forth, however no way I can achieve it. It really drives me crazy.

          Thanks in advance

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • GruensFroeschliG Offline
            GruensFroeschli
            last edited by

            ok now i'm really confused:

            LAN PF1 is 192.168.16.1

            *Wan is 192.168.1.150

            How should LAN of PF1 be able to communicate with WAN* if they are not in the same subnet?

            Maybe you should make a "clear" diagram of which IP-range is where, and what should have access to where.

            Whenever i start setting a new network enviroment up i first sit down with a lot of paper and do the planning work without even thinking about plugging any cables anywhere in or setting up any rules.

            We do what we must, because we can.

            Asking questions the smart way: http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • H Offline
              hansru
              last edited by

              As per your request the diagram:

              PFSense1 / Alix 2c1 bios v0.99 / R 1.2RC4 full (on microdrive)
              PFSense2 / Alic 2c0 bios v0.99 / R 1.2RC4 full (on microdrive)

              PF1 vr0 LAN 192.168.16.1/24 DHCP Server
                    vr1 WAN 10.0.0.10/24 DHCP client from ADSL modem
                    vr2 DMZ 192.168.1.1/24 DHCP Server
                    ath0 Wifi A 192.168.4.1/24 DHCP Server

              PF2 vr0 LAN 192.168.16.110/24 Static IP
                    vr1 WAN 192.168.1.150/24 DHCP client assigned by PF1
                    ath0 WIFI B disabled
                    ath1 WIFI C disabled

              I can ping from PF1 to PF2 WAN (192.168.1.150) from WAN / DMZ / WIFI /LAN
              I can also ping from PF2 to PF1

              What I want to achieve is to have access to the WEBgui on PF2 through PF1 to enable remote support. Is there anyone who knows what to do?
              It drives me crazy..

              network.jpg
              network.jpg_thumb

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • GruensFroeschliG Offline
                GruensFroeschli
                last edited by

                Did you create an advanced outbound NAT entry for your DMZ (and all other OPTx)?
                http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,7001.0.html

                Try setting the webgui of pfSense2 on port to (something_else_than_80) and create the rule on pfSense1 accordingly.
                DONT forward from 85 to 80 at first.
                Just a simple 8181 –> 8181 or so

                We do what we must, because we can.

                Asking questions the smart way: http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • H Offline
                  hansru
                  last edited by

                  ok, thanks for your input.

                  what i did is i reconfigured Webgui on PF2 to port 8181
                  I created a NAT port under port Forward

                  Also created a rule on the WAN. Do not understand what you mean with the Advanced Outbount NAT
                  Could you please give some guidance.

                  FIRewall_WAN.jpg
                  FIRewall_WAN.jpg_thumb
                  NAT.jpg
                  NAT.jpg_thumb

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • GruensFroeschliG Offline
                    GruensFroeschli
                    last edited by

                    The firewall rule should have as source-port * and NOT 8181.
                    If a client initiates a connection to you it orginates from a random port. NOT the same as the destination port.

                    To the advanced outbound NAT rule:
                    Read the link i provided above!:
                    http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,7001.0.html
                    @http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic:

                    If you want to have Internet access from multiple LAN subnets (on various OPTx interfaces) enable Advanced outbound NAT.
                    You need to create a rule for every subnet you want NAT'ed.
                    Alternatively you can change the source of single existing rule from LAN to "any" thus NAT'ing everything.
                    (screenshots to clarify: http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,7693.0.html )
                    This might create a problem for FTP with multiWAN
                    more here: http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,7096.msg40810.html#msg40810

                    We do what we must, because we can.

                    Asking questions the smart way: http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • H Offline
                      hansru
                      last edited by

                      Thanks for the fast response,

                      It has now be changed. However the AON does bother me. Í've read it several times, but do not fully understand this. does not work yet.

                      regards,

                      AON.jpg_thumb
                      AON.jpg
                      Firewall_Wan_v2.jpg_thumb
                      Firewall_Wan_v2.jpg

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • GruensFroeschliG Offline
                        GruensFroeschli
                        last edited by

                        The AoN rule you create basically tells pfSense manually which subnets should be NATed where.
                        With the rule you created you NAT your DMZ-subnet to WAN (which you want).

                        You will need to create another rule for every subnet you want NATed too (ie. WifiA and LAN in your diagramm).

                        so it stil does not work.
                        hmm,….

                        Did you change the source port to * on the pfSense 1 firewall rule too?

                        We do what we must, because we can.

                        Asking questions the smart way: http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • H Offline
                          hansru
                          last edited by

                          Yep, the rule in the firewall has also been updated to *

                          Attached the AON's for the three interfaces.

                          Still not succesful. Did you read my PM ?

                          regards,

                          AON2.jpg
                          AON2.jpg_thumb

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