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

    Upgrade to 2.01 has many broken connections

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Firewalling
    17 Posts 3 Posters 6.3k 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.
    • L Offline
      lfreeman
      last edited by

      No proxies are used either.

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

        If you have no proxy, static routes, etc, then it's harder to say.

        The raw log might give some better insight.

        Also under System > Advanced, on the Firewall/NAT tab, check that your optimization mode is not set to Aggressive, and make sure your state table size isn't set too low (the default is ~10% of RAM, at 1KB per state so with 1GB of RAM it would use 100,000 states.

        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
        • C Offline
          cmb
          last edited by

          The raw log would be helpful, we're mis-parsing something on the "TCP:lo" lines.

          Everything except those is probably no different than it's ever been, those are all FINs or RSTs and just normal out of state traffic that happens on occasion with every firewall. Just retransmits on connections that are already closed trying to close them again. Those cannot be the cause of any connectivity problems.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • L Offline
            lfreeman
            last edited by

            I'm using default values:
            State table size 1207/97000
            MBUF Usage 1716/25600

            Optimization is set to Conservative.

            I'll try to get a packet capture of the TCP:lo lines

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

              No need for a packet capture, if you see it in the GUI log, go to Diag > Command and run:

              clog /var/log/filter.log
              

              Then find the relevant line in the raw log, and copy/paste it here.

              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
              • L Offline
                lfreeman
                last edited by

                Ok.

                Firewall log:

                May 9 10:35:46 WAN   69.171.228.70:443   50.XX.XX.130:36046 TCP:lo

                packet:

                May  9 10:35:46 lascolinas pf:    69.171.228.70.443 > 50.XX.XX.130.36046: Flags [R.], cksum 0x76a3 (correct), seq 4021180300:4021180346, ack 165425407, win 0, length 46 [RST+ BIG-IP: [0x116b7f6:165] Flow e]
                May  9 10:36:38 lascolinas pf: 00:00:52.481053 rule 1/0(match): block in on bge0: (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 2239, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 788)

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

                  those don't appear to be connected lines, the timestamp should match on both.

                  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
                  • L Offline
                    lfreeman
                    last edited by

                    May  9 10:35:46 lascolinas pf: 00:01:06.694431 rule 1/0(match): block in on bge1: (tos 0x0, ttl 231, id 59683, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 86)
                    May  9 10:35:46 lascolinas pf:    69.171.228.70.443 > 50.84.43.130.36046: Flags [R.], cksum 0x76a3 (correct), seq 4021180300:4021180346, ack 165425407, win 0, length 46 [RST+ BIG-IP: [0x116b7f6:165] Flow e]

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

                      Looks like that BIG-IP: bit is throwing off the regex. Might need to try to tighten it up a little.

                      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
                      • L Offline
                        lfreeman
                        last edited by

                        Ok maybe this is a clue. How do these packets even show up on my LAN interface with the subnet ip of 10.10.16.0/24?

                        May 9 14:32:02 LAN   22.42.215.213:40849   209.85.145.188:5228 TCP:FPA
                        May 9 14:31:41 LAN   22.42.215.213:40849   209.85.145.188:5228 TCP:FPA

                        May  9 14:31:41 lascolinas pf: 00:07:13.689474 rule 1/0(match): block in on bge0: (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 14828, offset 0, flags [none], proto TCP (6), length 75)
                        May  9 14:31:41 lascolinas pf:    22.42.215.213.40849 > 209.85.145.188.5228: Flags [FP.], cksum 0xaf5e (correct), seq 3655068907:3655068930, ack 2331443737, win 8011, options [nop,nop,TS val 6610240 ecr 4266176071], length 23
                        May  9 14:32:02 lascolinas pf: 00:00:20.554728 rule 1/0(match): block in on bge0: (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 14829, offset 0, flags [none], proto TCP (6), length 75)
                        May  9 14:32:02 lascolinas pf:    22.42.215.213.40849 > 209.85.145.188.5228: Flags [FP.], cksum 0xa73e (correct), seq 0:23, ack 1, win 8011, options [nop,nop,TS val 6612320 ecr 4266176071], length 23

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • C Offline
                          cmb
                          last edited by

                          which NIC is bge0?

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • L Offline
                            lfreeman
                            last edited by

                            bge0 is the LAN interface. bge1 is the WAN interface.

                            bge0 is wired to our internal switch and bge1 is directly connected to our TWC fiber router. There is no other route out of the internal network except via bge1.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • L Offline
                              lfreeman
                              last edited by

                              I turned off our wireless access point and I haven't seen any more strange packets since. The only devices attached wirelessly were smartphones. Maybe a trojan on a phone was trying to DoS someone's server? The source ip is a DoD address.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • C Offline
                                cmb
                                last edited by

                                In order for logs like you're seeing on the LAN interface to show up, you'd have to somehow have gotten LAN and WAN mixed onto the same subnet. The logs such as:

                                May  9 14:31:41 lascolinas pf: 00:07:13.689474 rule 1/0(match): block in on bge0: (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 14828, offset 0, flags [none], proto TCP (6), length 75)
                                May  9 14:31:41 lascolinas pf:    22.42.215.213.40849 > 209.85.145.188.5228: Flags [FP.], cksum 0xaf5e (correct), seq 3655068907:3655068930, ack 2331443737, win 8011, options [nop,nop,TS val 6610240 ecr 4266176071], length 23

                                showing blocking of traffic with both source and destination of public IPs indicates that, you'll never see such traffic unless WAN and LAN are somehow interconnected (or a few other possible but much less likely scenarios like some host on LAN with a public IP manually configured). Given it stopped when the wireless AP was turned off, I suspect maybe somehow that was combining your LAN and WAN networks?

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