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

    NAT redirect back

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved NAT
    12 Posts 6 Posters 2.0k 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.
    • M
      muswellhillbilly
      last edited by

      You should be running a split-DNS setup to resolve the internal web server address locally, not using an external DNS server for your LAN cilents.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • N
        NOYB
        last edited by

        @muswellhillbilly:

        You should be running a split-DNS setup to resolve the internal web server address locally, not using an external DNS server for your LAN cilents.

        Pretty presumptuous of you to presume to know best what others should do.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • M
          muswellhillbilly
          last edited by

          @NOYB:

          Pretty presumptuous of you to presume to know best what others should do.

          Huh? The guy can access a locally-hosted server from outside but not from inside. Sounded like a straightforward DNS issue, so I made a suggestion. I thought that was the point behind having a forum?

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

            Considering the only "alternative" is the horrible NAT reflection clusterfuck, that suggestion is certainly spot on.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • KOMK
              KOM
              last edited by

              Pretty presumptuous of you to presume to know best what others should do.

              The problem was well-known, and there are only two solutions – one of which is inferior.  I don't understand why you would even post that.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • N
                NOYB
                last edited by

                Such arrogance.

                NAT reflection is valid and appropriate solution for some environments and implementations.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • M
                  maturola
                  last edited by

                  If we are done with arguing about the merit of some replies, maybe we can go back the issue, which I think I am having as well.

                  I posted here: https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=101113.0

                  came to realized I think the OP issues here is exactly the same as mine,

                  I tried Split DNS and NAT reflection and it just doesn't work.

                  @KOM:

                  The problem was well-known, and there are only two solutions – one of which is inferior.  I don't understand why you would even post that.

                  Those "pretty well known" solutions don't seen to be working for me or the OP…

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • KOMK
                    KOM
                    last edited by

                    NAT reflection is valid and appropriate solution for some environments and implementations.

                    Sure, if you want something that's slow and/or broken.  Seriously, it's dumb to NOT use spit DNS unless you don't control DNS in the first place.  Even the pfSense doc says it's a better solution ('elegant' is the specific word they use.)

                    I tried Split DNS and NAT reflection and it just doesn't work.

                    You don't have the same problem, I believe.  If you did, you wouldn't be able to access based on its public IP address from LAN.  That's the entire point of NAT Reflection, to allow you to access a LAN client from LAN using its NAT'd IP address.

                    Those "pretty well known" solutions don't seen to be working for me or the OP…

                    Oh, you know locus2k personally?  He hasn't replied from his initial post so we have no way of knowing what he has done since or if it's now working or not.  Plus, my comment about 'well-known' was to do with the problem, not the solution.  This problem is well-known enough to have a dedicated page at pfSense docs:

                    https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Why_can't_I_access_forwarded_ports_on_my_WAN_IP_from_my_LAN/OPTx_networks

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • M
                      maturola
                      last edited by

                      @KOM:

                      You don't have the same problem, I believe.  If you did, you wouldn't be able to access based on its public IP address from LAN.  That's the entire point of NAT Reflection, to allow you to access a LAN client from LAN using its NAT'd IP address.

                      I could say the same, do you know the OP personally, he never said he wasn't able to access from LAN using the public IP… however creating an argument about others opinions and thread is not really helping anyone, no sure what the point of such comments.

                      You may be 100% right, maybe it is the same issues maybe it is not, it sure look that way from here, I'm just sharing that I personally tried those "well known" solution and still have the issue.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • KOMK
                        KOM
                        last edited by

                        I could say the same, do you know the OP personally

                        I am not the one claiming he still has the problem which our suggestions didn't solve.

                        however creating an argument about others opinions and thread is not really helping anyone, no sure what the point of such comments.

                        The only 'argument' here is between people who have a history of knowing what they're talking about versus those who don't.

                        I'm just sharing that I personally tried those "well known" solution and still have the issue.

                        Then I guess you are cursed, or you don't have the same problem, or you screwed up the solution.  Can't tell based on you saying 'it doesn't work'.

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