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

    LAN GUI not accessible!

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    46 Posts 4 Posters 11.8k 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.
    • P
      phil.davis
      last edited by

      @kejianshi:

      Wait - I do see a POTENTIAL problem on the interface > LAN.  Its given a /16.  Shouldn't it get a /24?

      Assuming you are aiming for a simple configuration.

      It is a definite problem - LAN 192.168.2.10/16 is a router sitting in the middle of the whole of 192.168.0.0-192.168.255.255
      Then the WAN IP that you "happen" to be given by DHCP on WAN is 192.168.1.n with gateway 192.168.1.1 - that is inside LAN, so the routing will not work properly.
      When connecting a private-address-space LAN to an upstream "WAN" that is actually another chunk of private address space, you do have to engineer it to make sure the 2 subnets do not overlap.

      Change LAN /16 to /24 and I expect it will all go.

      As the Greek philosopher Isosceles used to say, "There are 3 sides to every triangle."
      If I helped you, then help someone else - buy someone a gift from the INF catalog http://secure.inf.org/gifts/usd/

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • K
        kejianshi
        last edited by

        A /24 includes, for example, 192.168.1.x
        A /16 includes, for example, 192.168.x.x

        So, unless I'm groggy headed today (It happens often) your LAN net is somewhat inclusive of your WAN net.  But if you changed the /16 to a /24 it shouldn't be.

        What can it hurt to change it?  If you don't like what happens, change it back.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • K
          kejianshi
          last edited by

          I'm trying to be soft and cuddly vs. my abrasive direct self…  haha

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • F
            ForensicGeek
            last edited by

            Right so I've changed the subnet on my LAN back to /24 and changed my firewall rules from /16 to /24 and everything is working the same way as it was.

            I have access to the webgui via WAN and LAN, I can ping out but not in and my gateway is still apparently offline.

            Still no internet :(

            Name = WAN_DHCP
            Gateway = 192.168.1.1
            Monitor = 192.168.1.1
            RTT = 0ms
            Loss = 100%

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • K
              kejianshi
              last edited by

              Perhaps, but you are now closer to a working configuration.  Did you turn off IPV6 for now?

              And can I see your WAN firewall settings?

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • F
                ForensicGeek
                last edited by

                @kejianshi:

                Perhaps, but you are now closer to a working configuration.  Did you turn off IPV6 for now?

                And can I see your WAN firewall settings?

                Just incase i'm being really stupid, I've attached a picture of my network adapter IPv4 settings within my virtual machine aswell.

                adapter.jpg
                adapter.jpg_thumb
                wanrules.jpg
                wanrules.jpg_thumb

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • K
                  kejianshi
                  last edited by

                  I'm sorry - I see your LAN and WAN rules.  My internet is abit slow here.

                  WAN look OK (for now)
                  LAN has ALOT of rules that seem to me are totally not needed and doing about nothing.

                  I'd get rid of them except the 1st grey one and the last 2 default rules.

                  The rest seem to not belong.

                  After that, I'd reboot pfsense.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • F
                    ForensicGeek
                    last edited by

                    @kejianshi:

                    I'm sorry - I see your LAN and WAN rules.  My internet is abit slow here.

                    WAN look OK (for now)
                    LAN has ALOT of rules that seem to me are totally not needed and doing about nothing.

                    I'd get rid of them except the 1st grey one and the last 2 default rules.

                    The rest seem to not belong.

                    After that, I'd reboot pfsense.

                    Again, same situation. Everything works apart from the internet! :(

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • K
                      kejianshi
                      last edited by

                      Well - 1st, I would let DHCP assign the IP and DHCP for windows VM.

                      But if you are going to assign it manually, put the IP of the windows machine outside the pfsense LAN DHCP range.
                      Then give the windows DNS server IP the LAN address of pfsense.

                      So, 192.168.2.10 for your DNS Server (Assuming you will let pfsense forward DNS, which is a smart thing to do usually)

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • F
                        ForensicGeek
                        last edited by

                        @kejianshi:

                        Well - 1st, I would let DHCP assign the IP and DHCP for windows VM.

                        But if you are going to assign it manually, put the IP of the windows machine outside the pfsense LAN DHCP range.
                        Then give the windows DNS server IP the LAN address of pfsense.

                        So, 192.168.2.10 for your DNS Server (Assuming you will let pfsense forward DNS, which is a smart thing to do usually)

                        You sir, are fantastic!

                        All this hassle was simply because I had not allocated my secondary DNS as 192.168.2.10!

                        Thank you so much for the help :D

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • K
                          kejianshi
                          last edited by

                          I'm thinking you don't quite get what is going on yet, but you are getting closer…

                          NAT comes in layers in your case and so can DHCP and DNS for that matter...

                          So your 1st layer, as far as we know is the university network.  They are then assigning an IP to pfsense WAN via DHCP and DNS via DHCP (we hope)

                          So pfsense then becomes your second layer of NAT and it can then assign IPs via its DHCP server and DNS to anything on its LAN...

                          Or you can tackle it manually.  Your call.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • K
                            kejianshi
                            last edited by

                            Ohhh - Glad it works now…

                            Us forum wreckers do what we can....  (-;

                            Sorry if I gave you the wrong impression with my comment earlier.

                            Just trying to find the core of the issue.

                            Let me know if you have more issues.

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

                              This is getting complex! Not helped by the fact that I have sent a few PMs with ForensicGeek so that info isn't available here.  ::) Let's keep things public.

                              The fact that the gateway is showing as down is not good and probably explains why routing is not happening. The gateway status is monitored by pfSense pinging the gateway address so it implies either the gateway is not responding to pings or it can't reply for some reason like a bad route. What is the gateway address? I assume it's a machine on your Uni network. If it's running IDS/IPS it may have objected to the constant pings and stopped replying.

                              A few things are unclear to me reading back through the thread. So for the sake of clarity:
                              You are using a single physical host machine and pfSense (and others) exist as VMs running in VirtualBox, yes? You seem to have used the term 'virtual box' where I would expect to see 'virtual machine' which is confusing (to me  ;)).
                              I'm not sure where or how you are testing that things are 'working'. Are you testing from a VM behind pfSense?

                              I have only used virtual box a few times but on each of those occasions the thing that tripped me up was assigning the correct network adapter type for host communication. As I recall the nomenclature used did not make it obvious and the docs were also unclear.

                              Steve

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • K
                                kejianshi
                                last edited by

                                Unless I misunderstood, its working for him now.

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

                                  Yes but I fail to see how adding a DNS entry to one of the VMs will have fixed the pfSense gateway issue. Also 192.168.1.1 should have worked as a DNS server for that VM anyway, unless the WAN gateway is not a DNS server. In which case what is it providing for DNS via DHCP on the WAN?
                                  I agree that there seems to be something more here. We shall see.  ;)

                                  P.S. W00t! 10K posts.  ;D

                                  Steve

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • P
                                    phil.davis
                                    last edited by

                                    [[quote]P.S. W00t! 10K posts.  ;D
                                    So are you trying to post all over just to catch JimP?

                                    As the Greek philosopher Isosceles used to say, "There are 3 sides to every triangle."
                                    If I helped you, then help someone else - buy someone a gift from the INF catalog http://secure.inf.org/gifts/usd/

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • K
                                      kejianshi
                                      last edited by

                                      Do your fingers hurt?  ;D

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

                                        Just kind of happened.  ;)

                                        Steve

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