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

    PfSense won't forward traffic form LAN server to internet

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved NAT
    28 Posts 7 Posters 5.2k 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.
    • G
      gjaltemba
      last edited by

      @lockheed:

      @gjaltemba:

      You can try unchecking the box “Block private networks” on the screen Interfaces WAN (at the bottom) and see if that solves your problem.

      That's one of those things I tried and forgot to mention  :(

      But the screen shot of the firewall rules shows Block private networks is in effect. I am confused.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • L
        lockheed
        last edited by

        @gjaltemba:

        But the screen shot of the firewall rules shows Block private networks is in effect. I am confused.

        Because I re-enabled it after I found out it did not change anything. Anyway, now I have it disabled again.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • G
          gjaltemba
          last edited by

          @lockheed:

          ★ My setup:

          Host (ArchLinux, nanoBox):
          Physical interfaces: with eth0 (no ip) and wlan0 (hostapd).
          Virtual interfaces: br0 (static IP 192.168.7.2 assigned with netctl profile)

          Guest (pfSense inside KVM):
          Guest interfaces:
          vtnet0 - bridged to eth0
          vtnet1 - bridged to br0 (192.168.7.1)

          My Host is also a web sever. I do not know if this is good practice, but br0 is the interface which which host services connect to internet.

          Does this mean pfsense WAN interface is assigned to vtnet1, has a static ip of 192.168.7.1 and pfsense LAN interface is assigned to vtnet0?

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • L
            lockheed
            last edited by

            @gjaltemba:

            Does this mean pfsense WAN interface is assigned to vtnet1, has a static ip of 192.168.7.1 and pfsense LAN interface is assigned to vtnet0?

            No, the other way around:
            eth0-WAN-85.x.x.x-vtnet0
            br0-LAN-192.168.7.1-vtnet1

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • G
              gjaltemba
              last edited by

              @lockheed:

              @gjaltemba:

              Does this mean pfsense WAN interface is assigned to vtnet1, has a static ip of 192.168.7.1 and pfsense LAN interface is assigned to vtnet0?

              No, the other way around:
              eth0-WAN-85.x.x.x-vtnet0
              br0-LAN-192.168.7.1-vtnet1

              Does 192.168.7.2 have 192.168.7.1 as gateway? I am guessing not because it has internet with pfsense in shutdown.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • L
                lockheed
                last edited by

                @gjaltemba:

                Does 192.168.7.2 have 192.168.7.1 as gateway?
                Yes.
                @gjaltemba:

                I am guessing not because it has internet with pfsense in shutdown.

                No, it doesn't. It only has LAN if I set br0 to static IP. I can then connect to it with my laptop (also with static IP) which connects to hostapd (bridged with br0).

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • H
                  hda
                  last edited by

                  @lockheed:

                  …
                  Well, I need my server on the LAN to be accessible from WAN.

                  Test approach: simplify your config, exclude your reliance on aliases & name(s).

                  You need probably:
                  [Firewall: NAT: Port Forward] with a rule like:
                  WAN TCP * * WAN address 80 192.168.x.y 80

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • L
                    lockheed
                    last edited by

                    @hda:

                    Test approach: simplify your config, exclude your reliance on aliases & name(s).

                    Thanks, but
                    @lockheed:

                    (nanoBox alias is assigned to 192.168.7.2 ip. Replacing alias with the ip itself makes no difference)

                    I have a new find that might shed some light on the source of the problem.

                    When I am on the host, pinging google.com works BUT going to google.com in a browser or with wget does not. In fact, no URL address works at all in any other capacity than PING.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • S
                      Supermule Banned
                      last edited by

                      Change your outbound nat for the subnet to include UDP as well.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • L
                        lockheed
                        last edited by

                        @Supermule:

                        Change your outbound nat for the subnet to include UDP as well.

                        Like so? http://i.imgur.com/4jgDqJj.png
                        It didn't help.

                        Also, please remember that those issues are experienced only on the Host of the pfSense VM. Every other pfSense manager LAN client works just fine.

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

                          @lockheed:

                          @Supermule:

                          Change your outbound nat for the subnet to include UDP as well.

                          Like so? http://i.imgur.com/4jgDqJj.png
                          It didn't help.

                          There is nothing useful visible there at all regarding protocol. (And please, learn to use the IMG tag.)

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • L
                            lockheed
                            last edited by

                            @doktornotor:

                            There is nothing useful visible there at all regarding protocol. (And please, learn to use the IMG tag.)

                            I selected ALL protocols. As for IMG, I am giving links to images because I did not want to clutter the thread with auto-displaying images.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • L
                              lockheed
                              last edited by

                              I just created an identical pfSense on VirtualBox and cloned the config on it. Everything works fine.

                              Here's the ifconfig of KVM setup:

                              ifconfig 
br0: flags=4163<up,broadcast,running,multicast>  mtu 1500
        inet 192.168.7.2  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 192.168.7.255
        inet6 fe80::4ccb:a9ff:feb7:5617  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20
        ether a0:88:69:0d:5c:41  txqueuelen 0  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 2825  bytes 330247 (322.5 KiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 3339  bytes 802554 (783.7 KiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

enp2s0: flags=4163<up,broadcast,running,multicast>  mtu 1500
        inet6 fe80::5ea1:75a3:7d46:befd  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20
        ether 00:90:27:77:fb:02  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 223027  bytes 20719723 (19.7 MiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 178  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 6747  bytes 2101069 (2.0 MiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

lo: flags=73<up,loopback,running>  mtu 65536
        inet 127.0.0.1  netmask 255.0.0.0
        inet6 ::1  prefixlen 128  scopeid 0x10 <host>loop  txqueuelen 0  (Local Loopback)
        RX packets 12388  bytes 1341938 (1.2 MiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 12388  bytes 1341938 (1.2 MiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

macvtap0: flags=4163<up,broadcast,running,multicast>  mtu 1500
        inet6 fe80::26f4:1e55:97a0:c0cb  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20
        ether 00:90:27:77:fb:02  txqueuelen 500  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 217268  bytes 20328935 (19.3 MiB)
        RX errors 8919  dropped 8919  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 6620  bytes 2073711 (1.9 MiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

vnet0: flags=4163<up,broadcast,running,multicast>  mtu 1500
        inet6 fe80::5d6b:398c:6b44:d602  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20
        ether fe:54:00:6f:2e:15  txqueuelen 500  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 4558  bytes 4062075 (3.8 MiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 4583  bytes 624983 (610.3 KiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

wlp1s0: flags=4163<up,broadcast,running,multicast>  mtu 1500
        inet6 fe80::6e57:fe92:1321:1521  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20
        ether a0:88:69:0d:5c:41  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 6040  bytes 811010 (792.0 KiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 7038  bytes 4986969 (4.7 MiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0</up,broadcast,running,multicast></up,broadcast,running,multicast></up,broadcast,running,multicast></host></up,loopback,running></up,broadcast,running,multicast></up,broadcast,running,multicast>

                              and of a much cleaner, and - more importantly - working VirtualBox setup:

                              # ifconfig 
br0: flags=4163<up,broadcast,running,multicast>mtu 1500
        inet 192.168.7.2  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 192.168.7.255
        inet6 fe80::a288:69ff:fe0d:5c41  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20
        ether a0:88:69:0d:5c:41  txqueuelen 0  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 4999  bytes 1686341 (1.6 MiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 9269  bytes 2203282 (2.1 MiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

enp2s0: flags=4163<up,broadcast,running,multicast>mtu 1500
        inet 192.168.11.13  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 192.168.11.255
        inet6 fe80::201:2eff:fe4e:4b99  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20
        ether 00:01:2e:4e:4b:99  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 175668  bytes 58689989 (55.9 MiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 35  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 33594  bytes 2862399 (2.7 MiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

lo: flags=73<up,loopback,running>mtu 65536
        inet 127.0.0.1  netmask 255.0.0.0
        inet6 ::1  prefixlen 128  scopeid 0x10 <host>loop  txqueuelen 0  (Local Loopback)
        RX packets 44600  bytes 11957420 (11.4 MiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 44600  bytes 11957420 (11.4 MiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

wlp1s0: flags=4163<up,broadcast,running,multicast>mtu 1500
        inet6 fe80::a288:69ff:fe0d:5c41  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20
        ether a0:88:69:0d:5c:41  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 4400  bytes 1698452 (1.6 MiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 8264  bytes 2315002 (2.2 MiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0</up,broadcast,running,multicast></host></up,loopback,running></up,broadcast,running,multicast></up,broadcast,running,multicast>

                              So it looks like KVM is not suitable for hosting pfSense VM if host machine is required have access to the internet. It is a shame as I was hoping for KVM to be not just working, but a superior solution.

                              Can someone move this thread to Virtualization?

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