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

    Multi-WAN, both lines down after power test, lines do not reconnect/connection

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved 2.0-RC Snapshot Feedback and Problems - RETIRED
    14 Posts 4 Posters 4.8k 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.
    • N
      Nachtfalke
      last edited by

      Hi,

      I found some more information. I got two e-mails from pfsense to my private e-mail box:

      Both are containing the same but were sent with a time difference from 2 hours:

      There were error(s) loading the rules: /tmp/rules.debug:124: syntax error
      pfctl: Syntax error in config file: pf rules not loaded The line in question reads [124]: pass  in  quick  on $LAN  $GWWAN2  from any to /8 keep state  label "USER_RULE: Zugriff auf WAN2-Subnet"
      
      

      When I did an reinstallation of pfsense for some weeks I did a missconfiguration of my gateways and pfsense then created "GWWAN2 and GWWAN1". Sometimes, when one WAN went down and I checked the gateways then "GWWAN2" appeared in the gateways list but it was the same as "WAN2" in the pictures above (same GW, same IP) just only other name.

      Here are some lines of the rules.debug:

       120 # make sure the user cannot lock himself out of the webConfigurator or SSH
          121 pass in quick on igb3 proto tcp from any to (igb3) port { 80 22 } keep state label "anti-lockout rule"
          122
          123 # User-defined rules follow
          124
          125 anchor "userrules/*"
          126 pass  in  quick  on $WAN2 reply-to ( igb0 192.168.2.1 )  proto udp  from any to   172.16.0.1 port 1194  keep st
      ate  label "USER_RULE: NAT OVPN-Server-01-RBS ueber WAN2"
          127 pass   in  quick  on $WAN2 reply-to ( igb0 192.168.2.1 )  proto udp  from any to   172.16.0.1 port 1195   label
       "USER_RULE: NAT OVPN-Server-02-KOST ueber WAN2"
          128 block  in log  quick  on $WAN2 reply-to ( igb0 192.168.2.1 )  from  ! 192.168.2.0/24 to any  label "USER_RULE:
      Nur zum Loggen"
          129 pass  in  quick  on $LAN  $GWWAN1  from any to 192.168.1.105/24 keep state  label "USER_RULE: Zugriff auf WAN1-
      Subnet"
          130 pass  in  quick  on $LAN  $GWWAN2  from any to 192.168.2.0/24 keep state  label "USER_RULE: Zugriff auf WAN2-Su
      bnet"
      

      Perhaps this was causing the problem !?

      This is from rules.debug.old:

       120 # make sure the user cannot lock himself out of the webConfigurator or SSH
          121 pass in quick on igb3 proto tcp from any to (igb3) port { 80 22 } keep state label "anti-lockout rule"
          122
          123 # User-defined rules follow
          124
          125 anchor "userrules/*"
          126 pass  in  quick  on $WAN2 reply-to ( igb0 192.168.2.1 )  proto udp  from any to   172.16.0.1 port 1194  keep st
      ate  label "USER_RULE: NAT OVPN-Server-01-RBS ueber WAN2"
          127 pass   in  quick  on $WAN2 reply-to ( igb0 192.168.2.1 )  proto udp  from any to   172.16.0.1 port 1195   label
       "USER_RULE: NAT OVPN-Server-02-KOST ueber WAN2"
          128 block  in log  quick  on $WAN2 reply-to ( igb0 192.168.2.1 )  from  ! 192.168.2.0/24 to any  label "USER_RULE:
      Nur zum Loggen"
          129 pass  in  quick  on $LAN  $GWWAN1  from any to 192.168.1.105/24 keep state  label "USER_RULE: Zugriff auf WAN1-
      Subnet"
          130 pass  in  quick  on $LAN  $GWWAN2  from any to 192.168.2.0/24 keep state  label "USER_RULE: Zugriff auf WAN2-Su
      bnet"
          131 pass  in  quick  on $LAN  proto { tcp udp }  from any  to <vpns> keep state  label "NEGATE_ROUTE: Negate policy
       route for vpn(s)"
          132 pass  in  quick  on $LAN  $GWNoLoadBalance  proto { tcp udp }  from any to any port $SingleWANPorts  keep state
        label "USER_RULE: Alle Ports die KEIN LoadBalancing k\xf6nnen"
          133 pass  in  quick  on $LAN  from any  to <vpns> keep state  label "NEGATE_ROUTE: Negate policy route for vpn(s)"
          </vpns></vpns>
      

      And this is the "diff" of my configuration:

      Configuration diff from 7/31/11 22:59:18 to 8/2/11 17:30:44
      --- /conf/backup/config-1312145958.xml 2011-08-02 08:15:52.000000000 +0200
      +++ /conf/config.xml 2011-08-02 17:30:44.000000000 +0200
      @@ -271,12 +271,12 @@
       <dhcphostname><wan>- <enable><if>igb0</if>
      
       <alias-address><alias-subnet>32</alias-subnet>
       <spoofmac>+ <enable><ipaddr>dhcp</ipaddr>
       <dhcphostname></dhcphostname></enable></spoofmac></alias-address></enable></wan> 
      @@ -347,6 +347,13 @@
       <reverse><nentries>2000</nentries>
       <nologdefaultblock>+ <remoteserver>172.17.1.1</remoteserver>
      + <remoteserver2>+ <remoteserver3>+ <portalauth>+ <vpn>+ <system>+ <enable><nat><ipsecpassthru>@@ -797,9 +804,9 @@
      <servicestatusfilter>dhcpd,ntpd,dnsmasq</servicestatusfilter>
      
       <revision>- <time>1312145958</time>
      - 
      - <username>(system)</username>
      + <time>1312299044</time>
      + 
      + <username>admin@172.17.1.1</username></revision> 
       <openvpn><openvpn-server>@@ -896,6 +903,7 @@
      <gateway>dynamic</gateway>
      <name>WAN1</name>
      <weight>1</weight>
      + <interval><monitor>8.8.8.8</monitor>
       <defaultgw>@@ -907,6 +915,7 @@
      <gateway>192.168.2.1</gateway>
      <name>WAN2</name>
      <weight>1</weight>
      + <interval><monitor>8.8.4.4</monitor></interval></defaultgw></interval></openvpn-server></openvpn></ipsecpassthru></nat></enable></system></vpn></portalauth></remoteserver3></remoteserver2></nologdefaultblock></reverse></dhcphostname> 
      
      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • stephenw10S
        stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
        last edited by

        You have your DNS servers set to 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 and one on each gateway?

        Steve

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

          @stephenw10:

          You have your DNS servers set to 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 and one on each gateway?

          Steve

          Yes, but I have got another one for each WAN. Take a look at my screenshot.

          BUT I have got the monitor IPs on 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4
          Both are google DNS servers….could it possible that both went down !?
          But they were working later but pfsense wasn't able to work as it did before.

          ---- edit ----
          Another thing which is curious is in the RRD graphs. Why is there "GW_WAN" displayed ?
          I do not have such a gateway as you can see in my first post.
          Not sure if this all has something to do with my problem posted in the first post.

          DNS.jpg
          DNS.jpg_thumb

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

            I tested a little bit with my pfsense.

            In general, if both WAN1 and WAN2 are UP, then the default GW is WAN1 ( 192.168.1.1 ). Then pfsense is able to check for updates. For testing purposes I restartet my router for WAN1 and the routing table in pfsense changed. The default GW is now my LAN address ( 172.16.0.254 ). Of course this is not correct and because of this pfsense cannot check for updates.

            ![WAN1 down.jpg](/public/imported_attachments/1/WAN1 down.jpg)
            ![WAN1 down.jpg_thumb](/public/imported_attachments/1/WAN1 down.jpg_thumb)
            ![Default_GW_WAN down.jpg](/public/imported_attachments/1/Default_GW_WAN down.jpg)
            ![Default_GW_WAN down.jpg_thumb](/public/imported_attachments/1/Default_GW_WAN down.jpg_thumb)

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

              Hmm,
              Why do you have LAN set as a gateway? That must cause problems.

              I have that same issue with my RRD graphs. It still maintains graphs for any gateways that have ever existed. I renamed one at one time so now it has an empty graph.

              Steve

              Edit: See this post.

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

                @stephenw10:

                Hmm,
                Why do you have LAN set as a gateway? That must cause problems.

                Because I am using another pfsense in routing mode behind my first one and so I have to create a static route with gateway.

                I have that same issue with my RRD graphs. It still maintains graphs for any gateways that have ever existed. I renamed one at one time so now it has an empty graph.

                Steve

                Thanks for info. So that shouldn't be cause of my problem. :-(

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

                  Uncheck the advanced option of switching gateways.

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

                    @ermal:

                    Uncheck the advanced option of switching gateways.

                    I did this yesterday and it kicked me off my OpenVPN and this morning there wasnt any connection to the internet possible.

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

                      Looks like a fix?
                      https://github.com/bsdperimeter/pfsense/commit/e56a730636d36714b29fdec9947f4b8d0f2ff443

                      Steve

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

                        @stephenw10:

                        Looks like a fix?
                        https://github.com/bsdperimeter/pfsense/commit/e56a730636d36714b29fdec9947f4b8d0f2ff443

                        Steve

                        I read this. I will test a new snap tomottow when I am on work and can get close to my server ;)

                        PS: Why cant pfsense get any updates when in MultiWAN with WAN1 (default GW) and WAN2 and WAN1 is down ? Then the GUI is slower and it ends in "unable to check for updates"
                        For me it feels like Multi-WAN is a little bit "buggy" when it does failover. But perhaps this is only my feeling.

                        Nevertheless thank you very much for taking time and giving advice.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • M
                          Metu69salemi
                          last edited by

                          Is there possibility to that pfsense itself can't use failover dns

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