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

    [2.1] site2site vpn stops to work after Multi VPN server firmware upgrade

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved OpenVPN
    27 Posts 4 Posters 5.9k 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.
    • V
      vielfede
      last edited by

      Great job mikeisfly!  :)
      But there is an error: on site 2. It got the same virtual VPN IP of site 1: 192.168.12.2 (as you can see on my attachment)

      @mikeisfly:

      So I'm thinking when you make your static routes, when you want to get to the 10.106.100.0/24 network you need to send traffic to 192.168.12.2. Similarly when you want to send traffic to 10.116.100.0/24 you need to send traffic to 192.168.12.3. I'm thinking that you can just make a static route to accomplish this and no further configurations are need under OpenVPN.

      I agree… but as I stated on my prev message, on RC1 routes are added automatically! (as you can see on figure routes_2.1-RC1.jpg), hence I do not understand why it shouldn't work On 2.1-RELEASE. Moreover as stated before, I remember the 2 routes on Diagnostic->routes panel on 2.1 RELEASE automatically

      I do not need site1 to site2 link (hub&spoke). I use hub&spoke on RoadWarrior connection(mainsite): my roadWarrior VPN is configurend to allow RW cliients get access to mainsite LAN, site1 LAN and site2 LAN.
      That by means of iroute/route OpenVPN commands. Those commands add routes on each site as needed, without any other custom static route or something like that.

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

        But there is an error: on site 2. It got the same virtual VPN IP of site 1: 192.168.12.2 (as you can see on my attachment)

        That's interesting? Not sure how that is working when two sites have the same virtual IP. Doesn't seem like it should work. Maybe this is the issue with 2.1 Release. I will try to set something up in my lab and let you know the results. Like you said if we can figure out what's going on others can use this as resource for future issues.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • V
          vielfede
          last edited by

          @mikeisfly:

          But there is an error: on site 2. It got the same virtual VPN IP of site 1: 192.168.12.2 (as you can see on my attachment)

          That's interesting? Not sure how that is working when two sites have the same virtual IP. Doesn't seem like it should work. Maybe this is the issue with 2.1 Release. I will try to set something up in my lab and let you know the results. Like you said if we can figure out what's going on others can use this as resource for future issues.

          I don't know… It has worked flawlessly on 2.01, 2.02, 2.03, 2.1-RC0, 2.1-RC1.
          Thank you for your interest.
          I hope this can help other pfSense users..

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • V
            vielfede
            last edited by

            [UPDATE]
            This afternoon I set a test 2.1-RELEASE pfSense on my mainsite and….

            As I stated before no difference in routing... (I got some images but they are useless beeing identical to the 2.1-RC1).
            Moreover:

            • I can ping site1 from inside mainsite pfsensefw

            • I can ping site2 from inside mainsite pfsensefw

            Indeed the problem seems to be on multiwan gw.
            Disabling failover/loadbal on lan net both vpn start to work.
            I found a similar problem here: http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,68494.0.html

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • T
              tim.mcmanus
              last edited by

              What do your firewall logs show?  Where is this traffic getting blocked if at all?

              What do the traceroute logs show?

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • V
                vielfede
                last edited by

                Here It's the traceroute…
                I did not look to the firewall logs... as I thought no block was on! Tomorrow I'll take a look...

                tracert.JPG
                tracert.JPG_thumb

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • V
                  vielfede
                  last edited by

                  This morning I have checked up the fw logs….
                  No block at all...

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

                    I have no experience with doing a site to site over a MultiWAN setup but I would just make sure that you have 1194 opened up on both interfaces. I would also switch to UDP as TCP could be a source of your problems. Just thinking out loud could there be a problem traffic leaving one WAN interface and then coming back on Anohter? If you disable one of your WAN interfaces does this solve your issues. Is something that is even possible for you to do?

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • V
                      vielfede
                      last edited by

                      No way… at the moment I do not use the 2nd WAN in vpn conf (just internet conn). And the vpn is up and running (=> no fw problem) hence as I stated above disabling just the "multigw" allow vpn to "ping"…
                      Indeed there is something wrong on routing in 2.1-RELEASE when  vpn is coupled with multigw.

                      I don't know if there is something other we can do....

                      I hope in some admin/developer help...
                      Pleeeeeeeeeeese!  :)

                      Otherwise I (we?) have just to wait 2.1.1...

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • V
                        vielfede
                        last edited by

                        Summarizing I thought It can be only a bug: how is possible routing differently 2 nets with the same gw?

                        finally… I submit a bug on https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/3309

                        I hope this help...

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • V
                          vielfede
                          last edited by

                          [SOLVED]
                          Fix will be available on 2.1.1

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