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

    Pfsense with 3 NICS

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    75 Posts 7 Posters 17.5k 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.
    • J
      Jamerson
      last edited by

      @stephenw10:

      You have bridge0 containing both em1 and em2. They both have static IP addresses in different subnets. Are they both running dhcp? (Is that possible?). You have bridged the two subnets so that they both exist across both network segments. I'm fairly sure you don't want to do that.

      Steve

      Hi Stephen
      LAN2 has a DHCP enable and the machines recieves the IP from the DHCP server
      192.168.6.11
      255.255.255.0
      192.168.6.1

      @doktornotor:

      I cannot see any pfSense anywhere on the networking diagrams you posted. Really dunno what you are trying to do there. When nothing's connected, nothing will work. Other than that - flush the mess you have created down the drain, and produce a barebones basic setup with 3 NICs. No "teaming", "bridging" and similar nonsense.

      ASA Firewall is the PFSENSE on the diagrame,
      i havent created any Teaming yet. i am just trying to get the VM to access the internet without Physical NIC attached to the Vswitch on the ESXI
      @johnpoz:

      Good catch.. Didn't even get that far in his listing

      bridge0: flags=8843 <up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
              ether 02:1b:ed:00:ce:00
              id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15
              maxage 20 holdcnt 6 proto rstp maxaddr 100 timeout 1200
              root id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 ifcost 0 port 0
              member: em2 flags=143 <learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp>ifmaxaddr 0 port 3 priority 128 path cost 20000
              member: em1 flags=143 <learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp>ifmaxaddr 0 port 2 priority 128 path cost 20000

      I just don't get it.. You really just click click and pfsense works out of the box – its like these users go out of their way to have issues.. Why would he have created a bridge??  When clearly he mentions multiple segments.  And he seems to have a hard time posting actual info that is what his network is..  How do you not notice that what you posts shows NOTHING connected to your vswitches? ;)</learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp></learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp></up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast>

      i have created a vm and attached to LAN2 with LAN2 NIC of PFSENSE
      and still can't get to the internet
      i didnt really created any bridg connection, probably it out of the box ?

      Win7.jpg
      Win7.jpg_thumb
      route-print.jpg
      route-print.jpg_thumb

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • D
        doktornotor Banned
        last edited by

        @Jamerson:

        i didnt really created any bridg connection, probably it out of the box ?

        No, there is absolutely NO bridge created out of the box. As already suggested quite some time ago, reset the config to factory defaults and start from scratch, with a simple setup, and do not do anything else until you understand the consequences.

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

          @Jamerson:

          i didnt really created any bridg connection, probably it out of the box ?

          Not any time I've installed pfSense.  ;) Though I've never used the OVA preconfigured VM.
          I too would not expect to see a bridge interface unless you have deliberately created one.

          Steve

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • johnpozJ
            johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
            last edited by

            There is NO bridge out of the box that is for SURE!!  You must of created it - delete that!!

            And your saying your clients are getting this via dhcp

            192.168.6.11
            255.255.255.0
            192.168.6.1

            Well so 6.1 is your gateway?  But pfsense doesn't have an IP on 6.1 via your ifconfig – it has .0 as its address.. Which is the WIRE and not a valid host IP for your mask of /24

            em2: flags=8943 <up,broadcast,running,promisc,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                    options=9b <rxcsum,txcsum,vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum>ether 00:50:56:8c:a6:3b
                    inet 192.168.6.0 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.6.255
                    inet6 fe80::250:56ff:fe8c:a63b%em2 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x3
                    nd6 options=1 <performnud>media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex>)
                    status: active</full-duplex></performnud></rxcsum,txcsum,vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum></up,broadcast,running,promisc,simplex,multicast>

            An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
            If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
            Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
            SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • J
              Jamerson
              last edited by

              @johnpoz:

              There is NO bridge out of the box that is for SURE!!  You must of created it - delete that!!

              And your saying your clients are getting this via dhcp

              192.168.6.11
              255.255.255.0
              192.168.6.1

              Well so 6.1 is your gateway?  But pfsense doesn't have an IP on 6.1 via your ifconfig – it has .0 as its address.. Which is the WIRE and not a valid host IP for your mask of /24

              em2: flags=8943 <up,broadcast,running,promisc,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                      options=9b <rxcsum,txcsum,vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum>ether 00:50:56:8c:a6:3b
                      inet 192.168.6.0 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.6.255
                      inet6 fe80::250:56ff:fe8c:a63b%em2 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x3
                      nd6 options=1 <performnud>media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex>)
                      status: active</full-duplex></performnud></rxcsum,txcsum,vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum></up,broadcast,running,promisc,simplex,multicast>

              the 192.168.6.0 i fixed it,
              the LAN 2 NIC was assigned with the wrong IP 192.168.6.0 but now it's 192.168.6.1
              can you direct me how to create the bridg between the two LAN ?

              em0: flags=8843 <up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                      options=9b <rxcsum,txcsum,vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum>ether 00:50:56:a8:1a:4a
                      inet 192.168.2.3 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.2.255
                      inet6 fe80::250:56ff:fea8:1a4a%em0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
                      nd6 options=1 <performnud>media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex>)
                      status: active
              em1: flags=8943 <up,broadcast,running,promisc,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                      options=9b <rxcsum,txcsum,vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum>ether 00:50:56:8c:7e:c8
                      inet 192.168.4.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.4.255
                      inet6 fe80::250:56ff:fe8c:7ec8%em1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2
                      nd6 options=1 <performnud>media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex>)
                      status: active
              em2: flags=8943 <up,broadcast,running,promisc,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                      options=98 <vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum>ether 00:50:56:8c:a6:3b
                      inet6 fe80::250:56ff:fe8c:a63b%em2 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x3
                      inet 192.168.6.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.6.255
                      nd6 options=1 <performnud>media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex>)
                      status: active
              plip0: flags=8810 <pointopoint,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
              pflog0: flags=100 <promisc>metric 0 mtu 33144
              lo0: flags=8049 <up,loopback,running,multicast>metric 0 mtu 16384
                      options=3 <rxcsum,txcsum>inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000
                      inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128
                      inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x6
                      nd6 options=3 <performnud,accept_rtadv>pfsync0: flags=0<> metric 0 mtu 1460
                      syncpeer: 224.0.0.240 maxupd: 128 syncok: 1
              enc0: flags=0<> metric 0 mtu 1536
              bridge0: flags=8843 <up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                      ether 02:1b:ed:00:ce:00
                      id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15
                      maxage 20 holdcnt 6 proto rstp maxaddr 100 timeout 1200
                      root id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 ifcost 0 port 0
                      member: em2 flags=143 <learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp>ifmaxaddr 0 port 3 priority 128 path cost 20000
                      member: em1 flags=143 <learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp>ifmaxaddr 0 port 2 priority 128 path cost 20000
              ovpns1: flags=8051 <up,pointopoint,running,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                      options=80000 <linkstate>inet6 fe80::250:56ff:fea8:1a4a%ovpns1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0xa
                      inet 192.168.200.1 --> 192.168.200.2 netmask 0xffffffff
                      nd6 options=3 <performnud,accept_rtadv>Opened by PID 10306</performnud,accept_rtadv></linkstate></up,pointopoint,running,multicast></learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp></learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp></up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast></performnud,accept_rtadv></rxcsum,txcsum></up,loopback,running,multicast></promisc></pointopoint,simplex,multicast></full-duplex></performnud></vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum></up,broadcast,running,promisc,simplex,multicast></full-duplex></performnud></rxcsum,txcsum,vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum></up,broadcast,running,promisc,simplex,multicast></full-duplex></performnud></rxcsum,txcsum,vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum></up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast> 
              
              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • D
                doktornotor Banned
                last edited by

                @Jamerson:

                can you direct me how to create the bridg between the two LAN ?

                Huh?! You already have one even though you should NOT have any as there's no reason for that!

                
                bridge0: flags=8843 <up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                        ether 02:1b:ed:00:ce:00
                        id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15
                        maxage 20 holdcnt 6 proto rstp maxaddr 100 timeout 1200
                        root id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 ifcost 0 port 0
                        member: em2 flags=143 <learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp>ifmaxaddr 0 port 3 priority 128 path cost 20000
                        member: em1 flags=143 <learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp>ifmaxaddr 0 port 2 priority 128 path cost 20000</learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp></learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp></up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast> 
                

                Are you actually listening to what people are writing here? WHY do you want to create yet another bridge?  :o

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • J
                  Jamerson
                  last edited by

                  @doktornotor:

                  @Jamerson:

                  can you direct me how to create the bridg between the two LAN ?

                  Huh?! You already have one even though you should NOT have any as there's no reason for that!

                  
                  bridge0: flags=8843 <up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                          ether 02:1b:ed:00:ce:00
                          id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15
                          maxage 20 holdcnt 6 proto rstp maxaddr 100 timeout 1200
                          root id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 ifcost 0 port 0
                          member: em2 flags=143 <learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp>ifmaxaddr 0 port 3 priority 128 path cost 20000
                          member: em1 flags=143 <learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp>ifmaxaddr 0 port 2 priority 128 path cost 20000</learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp></learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp></up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast> 
                  

                  Are you actually listening to what people are writing here? WHY do you want to create yet another bridge?  :o

                  i already answer this will be for testing, thank you .

                  LAN1 is production and LAN2 is for testing

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • D
                    doktornotor Banned
                    last edited by

                    Well, dude… this goes nowhere. WHAT are you testing with a setup that is totally FUBARed and you refuse any advise to get it fixed? You already bridged 2 out of 3 LANs, so what else do you want to bridge and WHY? . Like, some real reason what you expect from that. No, "it's for testing" is NOT any reason that makes sense. You have already tested that your setup does not work.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • johnpozJ
                      johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                      last edited by

                      And you would not "bridge" between "production" and "testing"..  You might bridge between physical segment that you need to extend into different locations - using 1 address network block.  You would not bridge 2 different networks segments.  That is utter nonsense..

                      And as already pointed out you already have one - which you say you didn't create..  WTF dude??  delete it - or better yet.  Just wipe this pfsense vm completely and start over with a download iso you boot your new vm to and install.  You should have nice clean setup with what you want to do it like 5 minutes top..  Out of the box you have to do like 3 things - set your wan static, change your lan to your ip range you want to use vs the default 192.168.1.0/24 and then create your 2nd segment and put in the any any firewall rule on this lan2 segment.  There your done!!

                      Then you can start testing - what I have no idea..

                      An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                      If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                      Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                      SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • J
                        Jamerson
                        last edited by

                        @johnpoz:

                        And you would not "bridge" between "production" and "testing"..  You might bridge between physical segment that you need to extend into different locations - using 1 address network block.  You would not bridge 2 different networks segments.  That is utter nonsense..

                        And as already pointed out you already have one - which you say you didn't create..  WTF dude??  delete it - or better yet.  Just wipe this pfsense vm completely and start over with a download iso you boot your new vm to and install.  You should have nice clean setup with what you want to do it like 5 minutes top..  Out of the box you have to do like 3 things - set your wan static, change your lan to your ip range you want to use vs the default 192.168.1.0/24 and then create your 2nd segment and put in the any any firewall rule on this lan2 segment.  There your done!!

                        Then you can start testing - what I have no idea..

                        John thank you so much for your continu support.
                        i will use a Physicall NIC to LAN 2.
                        really appreciate all your support guys.
                        and apologies if i caused any furstration !

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • johnpozJ
                          johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                          last edited by

                          Physical nic??  What??  Dude are you on medication or something?

                          An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                          If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                          Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                          SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

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

                            Try to remain calm.  ;D

                            We are somewhat going around in circles here.

                            Jamerson, what is your final goal here? Could you describe, perhaps with a diagram, what you are hoping to achieve.

                            Steve

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • johnpozJ
                              johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                              last edited by

                              Dude this guy is just loopy..  He is either off his medication or on some, or english is not his native language is only thing that explains this nonsense.

                              As to what he is trying to achieve, isn't it clear ;)  "i am using all my 3 NICS to use Teaming so all traffic will go thought the WAN."

                              So either stoned or not a native speaker is my guess ;)  I really want to help the guy - but its getting a bit ridiculous, maybe he is just trolling and having a good laugh?

                              An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                              If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                              Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                              SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

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

                                I am sure he doesn't know what bridging and teaming are. So it would seem that others don't either. It looks like he is wanting a routed solution. teaming in VMWare, Windows, and linux is akin to LAGG in pfSense. Bridging is completely different.
                                On LAN and LAN2, please unset the Gateways. Turn off blocking of private and bogons on LAN and LAN2. Not on WAN unless WAN network is private. Then if you changed from autoNAT, turn it back on unless you plan on some expert configuration.

                                Create an two aliases. One that has the LAN subnet in there 10.0.10.0/24 and another Alias that has LAN2 subnet in it (192.168.2.0/24). Then create an rule in LAN (or modify the existing one) that states Any proto, from LAN subnet, any port ::: to ::: !LAN2 Subnet (the alias you created) on any port ::: Allow.
                                Create a similar rule on LAN2 that allows any traffic NOT going to LAN to pass.
                                This will block LAN and LAN2 from communicating.

                                Hope that helps.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • J
                                  Jamerson
                                  last edited by

                                  John,
                                  yes English is not my First Language !
                                  what i want is explained on the attached Diagrams
                                  Vswitch 2 on the ESXI doesn't have a Physique NIC
                                  my Win7 can't reach the internet when the Vswitch 2 doesn't have a Physical NIC, when i connect a Physical NIC to the switch the internet start working,

                                  i used to use Vyatta for the laste 6 years, and it Always works fine like this way ( wihtout Physical NIC on the Vswitch ).
                                  with Vyatta i've bridged the LAN 1 and LAN 2 to each others to go over the WAN and reach the internet wihtout needing a Physical NIC on the Vswitch.
                                  i hope it clear to you what i want.

                                  Vswitch.jpg
                                  Vswitch.jpg_thumb

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

                                    Its clear to me. You just don't need to bridge unless you are going to run LAN and LAN2 in the same subnet. Routing will work just fine. You don't need as physical NIC in the vswitch. Everyone else is just saying that you have to have something in there that is part of pfsense and another machine. I have used this setup in a lab and it works just fine.

                                    Any more clarification would be good.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • D
                                      doktornotor Banned
                                      last edited by

                                      @johnpoz:

                                      Physical nic??  What??

                                      Hopefully he's not going to try to physically hammer the physical NIC to the virtual machine.  :o

                                      @OP: Remove the bridges nonsense. We won't move anywhere while it's still there in place. Plus, bridging on FBSD does not exactly work like you'd think it does when it comes to firewall behaviour, at least not unless you've flipped a couple of system tunables and assigned the bridge interface itself instead of its members, e.g. like here:

                                      
                                      bridge0: flags=8843 <up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                                              ether 02:5f:58:aa:bb:00
                                              inet 10.20.31.254 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.20.31.255
                                              inet6 2001:470:xx:xx::254 prefixlen 64
                                              nd6 options=1 <performnud>id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15
                                              maxage 20 holdcnt 6 proto rstp maxaddr 100 timeout 1200
                                              root id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 ifcost 0 port 0
                                              member: vr0 flags=143 <learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp>ifmaxaddr 0 port 1 priority 128 path cost 55
                                              member: vr2 flags=143 <learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp>ifmaxaddr 0 port 3 priority 128 path cost 55
                                              member: vr1 flags=143 <learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp>ifmaxaddr 0 port 2 priority 128 path cost 55</learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp></learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp></learning,discover,autoedge,autoptp></performnud></up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast> 
                                      

                                      (the above being an Alix box which serves pretty much as a dumb WiFi AP plus hotspot with captive portal), other than that, no firewall, routing only, all the physical RJ45 ports being bridged on a WAN - which is attached to another pfSense box via a LAN interface - and basically acting just as a dumb switch.)

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

                                        I think you screenshot from ESXi was cropped incorrectly, I can't see much of it.  ;)

                                        I agree with what others have said. You do not need a physical NIC to get connectivity. You do not need to bridge the two LANs to get connectivity, and in fact briding the LANs largely negates the point of having two separate LANs.

                                        Steve

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • J
                                          Jamerson
                                          last edited by

                                          @doktornotor:

                                          @johnpoz:

                                          Physical nic??  What??

                                          Hopefully he's not going to try to physically hammer the physical NIC to the virtual machine.  :o

                                          haha you are really funny guy !!  :o

                                          @stephenw10:

                                          I think you screenshot from ESXi was cropped incorrectly, I can't see much of it.  ;)

                                          I agree with what others have said. You do not need a physical NIC to get connectivity. You do not need to bridge the two LANs to get connectivity, and in fact briding the LANs largely negates the point of having two separate LANs.

                                          Steve

                                          Steve,
                                          I have 3 Virtual NIC on the PFSENSE,
                                          one is on the group of Vswitch 1 which is the WAN of the ESXI
                                          second one is the VSWITCH 2 which is LAN1
                                          and 3rd one is on the Vswitch 3 which is LAN 2

                                          I understand I don't need a Physical NIC to get the connectivity,
                                          Why when I remove the Physical NIC from the VSwitch 2 /3  the connectivity drops down ?
                                          attached is a screenshot of the Network Diagram on the ESXI.
                                          that why I've attached a Physical NIC to LAN1 otherwise it won't work

                                          on the Physique side , i will have a physical computers that will be a member of the domain controller that is running on the ESXI and need to have the access to the LAN 1 subnet over the WAN
                                          Like Physique computer on the room will need to have access to 192.168.4.0/24 and need to use the PFSENSE as it gateway.

                                          Thank you

                                          LAN.jpg
                                          LAN.jpg_thumb

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • johnpozJ
                                            johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                                            last edited by

                                            You DO NOT need a bridge!! You DO NOT need a physical nic connected to your vswitch.

                                            Remove the BRIDGE!  And you will be good.

                                            I run this exact setup.  Multiple physical lans, and one that is only vms (dmz)  I have no bridge in pfsense (you would not normally bridge 2 different address space segments).. My box in dmz can use the internet and is blocked from talking to lan or wlan because that is how I setup the firewall rules.  But lan or wlan can talk to dmz (this is normally how a dmz is setup)

                                            You have seen my esxi setup in previous - and you can see it in the background in the attached.

                                            So my workstation that is on lan (via physical nic connection in esxi to that lan vswitch) on 192.168.1.100 can ping the dmz win7 box.  See it attached on vswitch where pfsense also has interface (dmz 192.168.3.253) and w7 box is on 192.168.3.100/24 can ping google, but it can not ping the 192.168.1.100 machine because my firewall rules for dmz says you can go anywhere you want other than locals.  That is what the ! in front of it means "not" locals.  Locals is an alias in pfsense that includes 192.168.1.0/24 and 192.168.2.0/24 and my openvpn networks.  So per my firewalls rules on my lan I can go to the dmz.. But dmz can only "create" connections to networks that are NOT my local networks.  This common setup for a "dmz" segment.

                                            edit:  Seems I went over the attachment size for my dmz rules - see next post

                                            confignophynic-vswitch.png
                                            confignophynic-vswitch.png_thumb

                                            An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                                            If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                                            Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                                            SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

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