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

    Port foward reflection problem

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved 2.0-RC Snapshot Feedback and Problems - RETIRED
    27 Posts 6 Posters 9.7k 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.
    • E
      eri--
      last edited by

      https://rcs.pfsense.org/projects/pfsense/repos/mainline/commits/d9e258bb1df4c8a0d720c818ad433f8e9f6c3824

      Here is the fix.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • R
        Runefox
        last edited by

        Thanks, I can confirm that adding those lines did fix the filter load problem with port ranges. The only issue that remains now is that only the last of the NAT rules is kept in inetd.conf for reflection, rather than the entire table (as you can see with the inetd.conf I sent you as compared to the port ranges specified in the reflection rules). It appears that once the list is generated, it deletes all but the final NAT entry.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • E
          eri--
          last edited by

          https://rcs.pfsense.org/projects/pfsense/repos/mainline/commits/34fd61683d5ddaf531a0db916f4d7d5d1e07d54c

          :)

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • R
            Runefox
            last edited by

            I applied the diff to filter.inc and modified the NAT table to test it out. It doesn't cause any errors on reload or anything, but it doesn't actually write anything out to the inetd.conf file (it remains empty but for the tftp-proxy line) and the redirects end up not working. It's worth noting that I haven't yet upgraded from snapshot 20091222-1721, so I am working from that version of the /etc/inc/filter.inc file.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • R
              Runefox
              last edited by

              Sorry to double-post, but I've updated to the latest snapshot (20091224-0722) and the problem persists - The inetd.conf file isn't being properly written to, either not being populated at all, or being populated and then having all the entries removed. NAT reflection is enabled, and I've tried changing the NAT table to force a reload with no success. As far as I can tell, this is probably the last hurdle to getting NAT reflection working again.

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

                I also had this problem and here is how i fixed it, I'm not a coder (more sysadmin) so it kinda hack, but it should help the devs fix the problem and provide a solution for anyone who wants it. I had to make a few changes to /etc/inc/filter.inc

                Starting around line 803

                
                                                                $reflection_txt[] = "{$inetdport}\tstream\ttcp\tnowait/0\tnobody\t/usr/bin/nc nc -w {$reflectiontimeout} {$target} {$tda}\n";
                                                                $reflection_txt[] = "{$inetdport}\tdgram\tudp\tnowait/0\tnobody\t/usr/bin/nc nc -u -w {$reflectiontimeout} {$target} {$tda}\n";
                
                

                And alittle more down

                
                $reflection_txt[] = "{$inetdport}\t{$socktype}\t{$protocol}\tnowait/0\tnobody\t/usr/bin/nc nc {$dash_u}-w {$reflectiontimeout} {$target} {$tda}\n";
                
                

                You need to add a second nc in there, i got it from here http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/rdr.html

                Next a few lines down you need to update:

                
                                $inetd_fd = fopen("/var/etc/inetd.conf","a");
                
                                /* add tftp protocol helper */
                                /* fwrite($inetd_fd, "tftp\tdgram\tudp\twait\t\troot\t/usr/local/sbin/tftp-proxy -v\n"); */
                                $reflection_txt = array_unique($reflection_txt);
                                foreach ($reflection_txt as $txtline)
                                        fwrite($inetd_fd, $txtline);
                                fclose($inetd_fd);
                
                

                The big there was changing the "w" to "a" (the a tells it start at the end of the file, not the top). I commented out the tftp-proxy part, as this should be moved outside the loops somewhere, but I'm not using it so instead finding the right place, I just commented it out.

                Last change is around line 1166

                
                                        $natrules .= filter_generate_reflection($rule, $target, $extport, $starting_localhost_port);
                                        $natrules .= "\n";
                                        $starting_localhost_port++;
                
                

                You need to add the  "$starting_localhost_port++;". I could not find anywhere that was being incremented so every new rule was always using port 19000

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • P
                  puithove
                  last edited by

                  I just wanted to chime in here and mention that I'm affected by this issue.  I run a web access portal behind my firewall via NAT port forwarding.  Need to be able to use the same URL whether inside or outside my home network but the NAT reflection is not working.  Worked fine under 1.2.3 - does not work with "2.0-BETA1
                  built on Fri Jan 8 03:48:57 EST 2010
                  FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE-p2"

                  Edit:  Thought it might be useful to point out that this was an in-place upgrade from 1.2.3

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • E
                    eri--
                    last edited by

                    I made some changes lately so try newer snapshots.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • R
                      Runefox
                      last edited by

                      The latest snapshot (20100108-0349) has the same problem as previous - The NAT reflection rules are not created properly, and only the last NAT rule is listed. I can confirm that casshan's fix did actually solve the problem and that NAT reflection is fully working on my setup with those modifications. Many thanks, casshan! Maybe someone can clean it up to work with the tftp proxy so it can finally be deployed and fixed with future snapshots.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • E
                        eri--
                        last edited by

                        That is an old snapshot actually.

                        https://rcs.pfsense.org/projects/pfsense/repos/mainline/commits/01cf3e74e5c1fae3c47c0e0154a0f1bd0964d986
                        This are the changes.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • R
                          Runefox
                          last edited by

                          That's an old snapshot? It was (and is) the most recent available in the i386 repo. Are updates still being made at http://snapshots.pfsense.org/FreeBSD_RELENG_8_0/i386/pfSense_HEAD/updates/ or is there another place to receive updates now?

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • jimpJ
                            jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                            last edited by

                            The snapshot server is having some hardware issues and may not have been building new snaps. Last I heard they were waiting on FedEx to deliver the new server to replace it. I imagine it will have to undergo some configuration and testing before moving to the data center to replace the failed server.

                            The snapshots URL is actually pointing to a mirror site right now and not the server.

                            Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                            Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                            Do not Chat/PM for help!

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • P
                              puithove
                              last edited by

                              I just upgraded to "2.0-BETA1 built on Fri Jan 22 00:26:29 EST 2010" and am still having the issue.  After the upgrade I deleted a port-forward rule and recreated it with linked filter rule but it's still having the same issue.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • E
                                eri--
                                last edited by

                                Can you detail what issues?

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • P
                                  puithove
                                  last edited by

                                  @ermal:

                                  Can you detail what issues?

                                  Sure - the same issues as I mentioned previously.  I have a port forward setup for HTTPS to forward web access to an internal web server.  When I access the pfSense box's ip as https://xx.xx.xx.xx from a machine outside my private network, this works just fine.  When accessing it via the same URL from a machine on my internal private network, it is unable to connect.  Specifically, the error message from Firefox is "The connection was interrupted" which happens immediately - no timeout period.  If I remove the forward rule and try this connection again, Firefox waits a long time and then reports, "the connection has timed out".  This tells me that some part of the port forward reflection is working, but not successfully.

                                  This worked fine externally and internally under 1.2.3 but has failed from the internal side since I upgraded to the 2.0 beta a couple weeks ago.

                                  Since this was an upgrade and there are some mentioned issues with upgrading, would it be worthwhile to rebuild from scratch?  Would resetting to factory defaults be sufficient?

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • R
                                    Runefox
                                    last edited by

                                    I can confirm that the same thing happens to me as well with the current snapshots (grabbed 20100125-2045 last night); I've tested with HTTP, FTP and SSH. The inetd.conf file is actually populated this time; A small snippet of inetd.conf:

                                    19001   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 21
                                    19001   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 8075
                                    19001   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 28852
                                    19001   dgram   udp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -u -w 2000 192.168.1.253 28852
                                    19001   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 20560
                                    19001   dgram   udp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -u -w 2000 192.168.1.253 20560
                                    19001   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 3784
                                    19001   dgram   udp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -u -w 2000 192.168.1.253 3784
                                    19001   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 7708
                                    19001   dgram   udp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -u -w 2000 192.168.1.253 7708
                                    19001   dgram   udp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -u -w 2000 192.168.1.253 7717
                                    19001   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 7707
                                    19001   dgram   udp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -u -w 2000 192.168.1.253 7707
                                    19001   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.90 6881
                                    (...)
                                    19130   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.90 7850
                                    19130   dgram   udp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -u -w 2000 192.168.1.90 7850
                                    19130   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 22
                                    19130   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 80
                                    19130   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 65000
                                    19130   dgram   udp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -u -w 2000 192.168.1.253 65000
                                    19131   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 65001
                                    19131   dgram   udp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -u -w 2000 192.168.1.253 65001
                                    19132   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 65002
                                    19132   dgram   udp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -u -w 2000 192.168.1.253 65002
                                    19133   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 65003
                                    19133   dgram   udp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -u -w 2000 192.168.1.253 65003
                                    19134   stream  tcp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -w 2000 192.168.1.253 65004
                                    19134   dgram   udp     nowait/0        nobody  /usr/bin/nc     nc -u -w 2000 192.168.1.253 65004
                                    

                                    I'm not too familiar with how inetd.conf is supposed to be generated - Isn't the first column supposed to be unique per-entry (or per-port)? It seems like there's a good deal of overlap at the beginning of this portion (19001, 19130). Is that normal? Looking at the log, it seems like port ranges are the only things that increment the first column; Single port forward rules don't seem to increment.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • jimpJ
                                      jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                                      last edited by

                                      Commits for one of the below tickets may have introduced a bug in the course of trying to fix other bugs.

                                      http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/show/193
                                      http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/show/99

                                      Not sure which of those would be more appropriate to reopen in this case, probably #99. Copy that inetd.conf info into the ticket, along with as much info about your NAT port forward entries as possible.

                                      Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                                      Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                                      Do not Chat/PM for help!

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • E
                                        eri--
                                        last edited by

                                        Try latest snap.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • R
                                          Runefox
                                          last edited by

                                          Looks like the latest snaps aren't building properly at the moment (last good build was on the 25th, build.log shows signal 15's); I'll hold off on adding any information until I can get my hands on a fresh snapshot.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • jimpJ
                                            jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                                            last edited by

                                            It should be safe to try a gitsync instead:

                                            http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Updating_pfSense_code_between_snapshots

                                            Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                                            Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                                            Do not Chat/PM for help!

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