[Solved] OpenVPN NAT Outbound
-
Your picture is now successful in both places.
Destination should be "*" - you want general traffic heading to the internet in general to get NAT applied on the way out of pfSenseB towards routerB.
And that should be on the interface on pfSenseB that heads towards routerB.
I expect you also want a similar NAT rule for source 10.30.0.0/24 (traffic from pfSenseA LAN) -
Destination should be "*" - you want general traffic heading to the internet in general to get NAT applied on the way out of pfSenseB towards routerB.
And that should be on the interface on pfSenseB that heads towards routerB.
I expect you also want a similar NAT rule for source 10.30.0.0/24 (traffic from pfSenseA LAN)Like this?
It doesn't work;-( -
Why does the interface column say VPN_UDP?
I am expecting it to be the interface for pfSenseB eth0 (maybe called LAN or LAN1 or something), which is where the packets are exiting and need to have NAT applied.
Then the NAT address can be LANaddress or similar, rather than entering an actual IP address. -
Why does the interface column say VPN_UDP?
I am expecting it to be the interface for pfSenseB eth0 (maybe called LAN or LAN1 or something), which is where the packets are exiting and need to have NAT applied.
Then the NAT address can be LANaddress or similar, rather than entering an actual IP address.I also tried doing a NAT on output inteface. example eth0 on pfSense B, but it does not work.
And if I do a ping from 10.100.0.5 to 192.168.10.150, and I make a packet capture sur eth0 (BUREAUTIQUE), I do not see my ping request -
I think what you have done there on BUREAUTIQUE should work.
What firewall rules are on OpenVPN? Maybe the packet/s are bring blocked by the firewall?
Anyone see the problem here? -
What firewall rules are on OpenVPN? Maybe the packet/s are bring blocked by the firewall?
On all interfaces, I authorize any
I am surprised not to find other posts similar to my problem. There must be others who have NAT configured with OpenVPN
-
I found an example of this on my network - I have a WiMax device at a remote siteB. It is not in bridge mode, it is an upstream hop from the pfSense there, but it does not know anything about my internal network. It sees all traffic NATed from pfSense as coming from "WIMAXaddress", its address itself is "WimaxGW".
INF_Subnets is an alias that contains all internal addresses across the various office networks that are all VPN'd together.
I have a rule on WIMAX interface to NAT traffic from all of INF_Subnets when it goes out WIMAX.
Right now I am VPN'd into siteA. I can ping and traceroute to the IP of WimaxGW - the traffic goes from my laptop, across road-warrior VPN to siteA, across another VPN to siteB, then is NATed out WIMAX interface using WIMAXaddress to WimaxGW. WimaxGW replies to WIMAXaddres fine, it is unNATed, and routed back across the 2 VPN links to me.
Your setup should work in a very similar way.
Do some traceroute from SiteA and packet capture to see where things get to a where they stop.
-
I found an example of this on my network - I have a WiMax device at a remote siteB. It is not in bridge mode, it is an upstream hop from the pfSense there, but it does not know anything about my internal network. It sees all traffic NATed from pfSense as coming from "WIMAXaddress", its address itself is "WimaxGW".
INF_Subnets is an alias that contains all internal addresses across the various office networks that are all VPN'd together.
I have a rule on WIMAX interface to NAT traffic from all of INF_Subnets when it goes out WIMAX.
Right now I am VPN'd into siteA. I can ping and traceroute to the IP of WimaxGW - the traffic goes from my laptop, across road-warrior VPN to siteA, across another VPN to siteB, then is NATed out WIMAX interface using WIMAXaddress to WimaxGW. WimaxGW replies to WIMAXaddres fine, it is unNATed, and routed back across the 2 VPN links to me.
Your setup should work in a very similar way.
Do some traceroute from SiteA and packet capture to see where things get to a where they stop.A big thank you for your help!
By dint of making test, by doing this, it works now :
Thanks again :)
Have a nice evening
-
No problem. Yes, what you have done will definitely work! I guess the traffic across the VPN then going out of pfSenseB to routerB was going across VILLES or WINRADIO interface.
The wide NAT rules you have now will hide siteA LAN address from all devices at siteB - that might be good for conectivity, but if, for example, you want to log client connections to a server in siteB LAN, then all connections from siteA will apear to come from a pfSenseB interface IP.
It all depends on your requirements and whether you want to spend time narrowing down the rules to only the NAT that is essential! -
Yes I could restrict more NAT rules, but I have many networks behind pfSense A, so I prefer all open here:–)