[SOLVED] Setting up Tomato Wifi Router behind PFSense

[RickJ]

Thanks for the replies Nullity and Derelict,

Yes Nullity, as you suspected I didn't give my full topography, my apologies. I already have an ASUS router plugged into the PFsense LAN port which is providing connectivity to our main un-managed switch (this is why I was asking about bridging, Derelict).

Because I already have one router using the LAN port, I was hoping to plug in the wireless router into OPT1 and set up a separate network.

Now as far as the VLAN post you linked Derelict, would that information be what I need to do in my OPT1 settings?

[Derelict]

You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.

Just plug the new AP into the unmanaged switch.  I am at a loss why you think you need the Asus on LAN.

[doktornotor]

@Derelict:

You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.  You don't need a bridge.

And for a good measure:

You don't need any freaking bridge!!!

[RickJ]

Haha, thanks for the laugh guys, I needed that after having to come in on Saturday.  :D

I didn't mean to imply in my last post I was still thinking about the bridge, though I'm glad it happened now none the less.

To address the bafflement about the ASUS router, I've disconnected it and the switch is running directly into the LAN port. Works fine.

Part of my logic for wanting to go into the OPT1 port was the possibility of having the wifi on a different ip strcture/ subnet, such as 10.0.0.x instead of the 192.168.0.x.

Example of the topography I was thinking of:

gateway –-> pfsense --> main wifi router (10.0.0.x) ---> 4 or 5 wifi routers getting their dhcp from main wifi-router all on the 10.0.0.x.
                          |
                          ----> main switch on LAN port (192.168.0.x)

Am I over-thinking this here?  The part that I've expressed poorly is the hope of being able to separate the wi-fi onto a different subnet in the future. The idea behind it is "a separate subnet/ ip structure would be more secure." Am I missing the mark on security by wanting to separate the ethernet and wifi networks?

[Nullity]

The few things I have read on the topic mirror your thoughts; separating WiFi from LAN is a smart decision if you are concerned with security.

I have no personal experience with multiple LANs though… sorry.

[Derelict]

There is nothing wrong with segmenting your Wi-Fi.  Depends on what you want to do.

Things like windows networking, apple zeroconf/bonjour, autodiscovery, etc, are just a lot easier to use on one broadcast domain.  Set a good WPA2 passphrase, limit to AES only, put it on your LAN and rock on.

main wifi router (10.0.0.x) –-> 4 or 5 wifi routers getting their dhcp from main wifi-router all on the 10.0.0.x.

I would let pfSense do DHCP, but whatever.  And I'm pretty sure you mean wi-fi bridges/APs, not routers.

To do this I would seriously consider getting a managed switch so you can put wired ports together with a wireless network on a specific VLAN without having to…wait for it...make a pfSense bridge.  You could put a completely different SSID on a segmented VLAN with no access to the other VLAN.  Pretty sure Tomato supports that.  See that second link I posted above.  D-Link DGS-1100 will do everything you need for cheap.

[RickJ]

Hrm, I think part of the big concern is how we use our network.

We're a school, and were hoping to have a wireless network separated from our ethernet just for parent, phone, and tablet use. We already have this set up, it's just currently running through a separate router and not through PFsense at the moment.

I was hoping to merge it all into one, while still keeping the wifi from having access to the same network that our shared drives are on. Is that at all possible?

[Derelict]

Isn't there just bushels and bushels of "free" federal just-printed-out-of-thin-air money for wi-fi in schools?

[RickJ]

Probably, but we'ere a small mom and pop private school…so those funds aren't available to us.

No worries if what I was hoping for isn't a feasible model, worst case scenario would be that we have to save up for another PFsense box for the wifi if we really want the extra security.

[doktornotor]

@RickJ:

We're a school, and were hoping to have a wireless network separated from our ethernet just for parent, phone, and tablet use. We already have this set up, it's just currently running through a separate router and not through PFsense at the moment.
I was hoping to merge it all into one, while still keeping the wifi from having access to the same network that our shared drives are on. Is that at all possible?

Sure it's possible. Stick all those APs on a separate OPT interface via some switch. Choose a subnet big enough to accommodate the clients. Configure DHCP there. Do not run any DHCP on any of those WiFi APs. Configure the firewall rules on OPT as required (e.g., do not allow access from OPT to LAN). Done.

[RickJ]

Great, glad to hear that it's possible!

I'm not 100% sure, but I think what you're describing is what I tried to do in the beginning with configuring the OPT1 port, right?

I wasn't able to configure my OPT port to successfully give my wireless router an IP (I think that was the problem at least). Here are the settings I tried (from above)

Current OPT1 interface settings:

(Interface Enabled)
IPv4 configuration type: DHCP
IPv6 configuration type: none

The rest of the fields are empty except for the hostname that is currently "testwifi"

I have also gone into the firewall rules for OPT1 and added a rule to let all IPv4 traffic pass.

Once working, I'll definitely let the OPT do all the DHCP, and all wifi routers will just connect through a switch. Any ideas on why the OPT port wasn't allowing my test router to get through?

Again, thanks for the help on this…any and all recommendations are much appreciated.  :)

Edit

Sorry, I didn't see your edit recommending the managed switch above, Derelict. I must have started typing a new message while you were editing and I didn't scan the previous post. I'll definitely consider getting a managed switch for the future, but for the time-being I'm really trying to squeeze all I can of what we already have.

[doktornotor]

Of course, where should it be getting DHCP from? Configure a separate subnet there with static IPv4. You also need to create firewall rules on OPT to permit traffic.

[RickJ]

Ok, I think I'm probably suffering from a mild case of severe brain damage at this point, but I drew a blank when you asked "Where should it be getting DHCP from?"

Here is the process I'm conceptualizing at the moment:

OPT1 port (configured to serve dhcp to the wifi AP on the switch) –---> wifi switch ---> wifi AP

So I'd set the main OPT1 port config to something like this:

IPv4 configuration type: Static
Ipv4 address: 10.0.0.1

Enable firewall rules to permit all traffic through OPT1

…But doing it this way, where would the option to provide DHCP from the static IPv4 be coming from?

[doktornotor]

@RickJ:

So I'd set the main OPT1 port config to something like this:
IPv4 configuration type: Static
Ipv4 address: 10.0.0.1

…But doing it this way, where would the option to provide DHCP from the static IPv4 be coming from?

Hmmm? You simply configure a DHCP server on the OPT interface, like you did on LAN. Services - DHCP Server - OPT1 tab.

@RickJ:

Enable firewall rules to permit all traffic through OPT1

Thought you wanted this separated from wired. So, the destination for that allow rule should not really be any, but NOT LAN subnet instead.

[RickJ]

Ok awesome, thanks for the help doktornotor! I'm still learning the fine-tuning of configuring rules correctly, so I imagine that destination: "not lan subnet" is something I'd probably miss on the first flush.

I'll be going in again tomorrow to finish up some testing and will post here to let you know if the new setup works.  :)

[RickJ]

Hi guys, well round two and I still don't have this thing up and running…

As a quick recap so that lots of thread scrolling isn't needed:

I'm trying to set up a seperate WIFI network on my OPT1 interface. The light on the back of the PFsense box for the OPT1 port is green instead of orange (the working WAN and LAN ports are both orange). In the Status---> Interfaces page the OPT1 section reads: "no carrier" at the top.

Current OPT1 setup:

Interfaces –-> OPT1
-'Enabled'
-Static IPv4
-IPv4 Address: 10.0.0.x
-(all other entries are blank)

Firewall –--> NAT: Outbound
-Automatic outbound NAT rule generation

Firewall –-> Rules: OPT1
-(Image of full OPT1 Firewall settings attached) Basically allow all except to LAN network.

Services –-> DHCP Server
-'Enabled for OPT1'
-Range is set to 10.0.0.20 - 10.0.0.100
-Everything else is blank

Right now, I have the OPT1 port running to a switch with a Wireless AP on it, set up like this:

OPT1 –--> Unmanaged Switch ---> Wireless AP

Wireless AP settings:

WAN:off
LAN:
IP: 10.0.0.2
Gateway: 10.0.0.1 (OPT1 address)
DNS: 10.0.0.1 (OPT1 address)
Subnet: 255.255.255.0
Disabled DHCP.

Could this be a hardware problem, or am I missing an important step somewhere?

Thanks again for helping me get this set-up…although the wifi is still not working, I'm getting much more comfortable using the PFSense interface during the troubleshooting.  :)

[hda]

Config looks good.

[Interfaces: assign] is OK for OPT1 on NIC ? (no bridge stuff etc.)
Static entry for AP in [Services: DHCP server] ?
AP must be explicitly set to AP-mode ?
Rebooting both boxes did not help?

[RickJ]

Hi hda,

-Hrm…I have no recollection of the interfaces: assign section, that might be the step I'm missing. NO bridges at the moment though...or ever...no bridges...(see above posts)

-Didn't add a static entry for the AP, I'll try that out for sure.

-Not sure about AP Mode...using Tomato on a linksys e2500, and haven't seen any special customization recommendations aside from the standard setup I posted above...

-Rebooting doesn't solve it atm, hopefully the fix is one of the above.

Thanks for the suggestions, anything new to try is welcome since I'm totally stumped. I've left the office for today, so I'll have another go tomorrow morning and post an update then!

[Derelict]

No.  You want to REJECT traffic from OPT1 net to LAN net, then PASS traffic from OPT1 net to any.

In general for a protected, public segment:

PASS the specific local traffic you need them to access (DNS servers, etc)
REJECT the specific traffic you don't want (to other local networks, to the firewall itself)
PASS everything else (the internet)


[Derelict]

Thanks again for helping me get this set-up…although the wifi is still not working

You're plugging one of tomato's LAN ports into the switch right?  Not messing around with any VLANs right?

define "not working"

Do you not get associated over wi-fi with the tomato?
Do you not get DHCP?
Can you ping 10.0.0.1 by IP?
Can you ping outside (like 8.8.8.8 or your ISP's gateway) by IP?
Can you resolve names?

The above are in the general order that things have to be working.  If you can't do one, you need to fix that before moving on.

Can you ping 10.0.0.2 from pfSense Diagnostics > Ping?
Anything in the Status > System Logs, DHCP to indicate leases being allowed or rejected or ??