2 different external IP address for same network

johnpoz

So you need to have nat reflection setup if you want pfsense 1 to get pfsense 2 wan on cisco most likely. Or make sure its not blocking rfc1918 from its fowards, etc.. If your going to its wan directly via the 192.168.0 address your rfc1918 blocks it..

sangour111

it is problem from outbound NAT !!!!!!! or what

sangour111

please i need help

johnpoz

So how are you accessing the ftp? The public 42 address that is on your cisco wan or your 192.168 address that is on wan of pfsense2? Are you using active or passive? How do you have it forwarded on pfsense 2?

You say it works from outside.. ARe you using active or passive for this to work.. Do you understand even what active or passive ftp is?

http://slacksite.com/other/ftp.html

sangour111

no problem with ftp because i can get ftp server from any outside network
i use passive mode

i access from outside in ftp server with public ip 42.xx.xx.xx and it is work

but from pfsense 1 not working with 192.168.0.5 or 42.xx.xx.xx

in pfsnese 2 >>> wan>> 192.168.0.5 public ip >>42.xx.xx.xx

johnpoz

So what flavor of pfsense are you running? ftp helper was pulled out multi versions ago. So did you setup forward of the passive ports you use on your server?

So in your ftp server you hand out what IP in the passive command.. Lets see log of ftp from your client.. If it hands out your 42.x address when you connected to 192.168.0 on control that is going to be an issue most likely and if you hand out your 172 address how is that routed?

example here is me connecting to local ftp
05:03:35Command:PASV
05:03:35Response:227 Entering Passive Mode (192,168,9,8,19,213)

Tells my client to connect to 192.168.9.8 (19x256)+213 or port 5077 From outside there was a recent thread where I opened up ftp to the outside to show a person how to setup the passive forward.. You can see from that pic attached when I connect from outside it sends my public IP, but when local it sends local IP.. So does it send you 172 or the 42?

Your setup is way more complex than it needs to be for sure.. What is your cisco, why not just use that.. Why do you have 2 different pfsense? Why not just use one and put your different segments off the 1 pfsense? etc. etc.. Trying to use a antiquated protocol like ftp that has control and data channels with active and passive modes through a double nat and funky routing and nats between internal networks, etc.. KISS

passivebehindpf.png_thumb

doktornotor

Not to spoil your party, but… FTP simply won't work properly like this. NAT reflection won't do anything either, since it'd have to be done on the Cisco box, not on pfSense. In general, waste of time. Move on. Sanitize your multi-NATed setup or switch to a less broken and more secure protocol.

sangour111

it is problem from cisco or pfsense !!
it is problem name NAT Hairpin !!

doktornotor

johnpoz

Your problem if you ask me is not understanding the basic principles of ftp when used with nat and passive and active. And then an over complex setup from the get go. You clearly have a multiple nat setup where your natting your public IP to your pfsense wan, and then natting again on pfsense to networks behind pfsense?

I would simplify that setup. Why do you not just replace your cisco with pfsense box? And then run segments off that pfsense? If you set on using cisco at the front, why just just use 1 pfsense behind it. If your set on using 2 of them? Are they in different locations? Why nat rfc1918 space again - why not just route those networks? I would use transit networks from your cisco to your pfsense boxes in that case, etc.