Installing pfSense with a layer 3 switch
-
All interfaces in pfSense are untagged by default, with WAN configured to obtain an address via DHCP and LAN as 192.168.1.1 with an active DHCP server starting at .100. You should really start another thread with a specific question. Doesn't sound like this has much to do with this one.
Well, Coxhaus asked the same question, how to access/manage the pfSense other than the console when setup with a /30 address and you said "That's what management VLANs are for.".
I take your point and will start a new thread with specific questions when I start setting up pfSense with my SG300 L3 switch.
-
Out-of-band management of your firewall gets tricky. Cisco ASAs have the same problem. It would be really nice to have an interface that, by default, wasn't in the firewall's main routing table and wasn't accessible via the other normal interfaces, yet listened on ssh and webgui.
I would settle for forcing management interfaces (ssh, webgui, snmp, etc) to only listen on a specific interface's IP address.
As it is you have to create a VLAN interface. It will also be listening on management services.
Block access to all management ports/addresses on unfriendly interfaces. -
What does the transit network size have to do with management??
You do understand you can get to the webgui or ssh on any IP in pfsense as long as your rules allow it. Even from the wan side if you allow it via rules.
-
What does the transit network size have to do with management??
Obviously nothing.
You do understand you can get to the webgui or ssh on any IP in pfsense as long as your rules allow it. Even from the wan side if you allow it via rules.
I did not know and that is why I asked. I understand now that you´ve explained it. I´m totally new to pfSense and have just started to read the documentation and information found on the forum.
I´m well aware that silly questions from n00bs like me might irritate expert users like yourself. You understand, we all have to start somewhere. ;)
-
Silly questions do not irritate me that is for sure, what can get frustrating is the same questions over and over and over and over again.. Without searching for the information yourself before asking ;)
But even whne the questions are "silly" I still answer them or point to where they are answered… So ask away your questions.. That is what we are here for.
-
People think this stuff is easy. And it is with a grasp of everything in the ISO model.
-
Silly questions do not irritate me that is for sure, what can get frustrating is the same questions over and over and over and over again.. Without searching for the information yourself before asking ;)
But even whne the questions are "silly" I still answer them or point to where they are answered… So ask away your questions.. That is what we are here for.
Thank you very much, sir. I really appreciate the great effort and help expert users like yourself and Derelict provide in the community forum.
Coxhaus and myself are both old farts. I´m 70 and retarded .. sorry retired ;D and unlike Coxhaus who I believe worked professionally with Cisco stuff in the old days, I just started with setting up a home network based on separate components (SG300-10, SG200-08, Cisco WAP371, Linksys LRT214) a few months ago. It´s the LRT214 I´m planning to replace with a pfSense firewall.
I´m moving in to a new 90 m2 apartment in a couple of months where I´ll put my home network in production. For sure I would do just fine with a small consumer router (Asus, Netgear etc.) or even the ISP provided one. I´m doing all this for fun, it´s an excellent pensionist exercise. :)
-
Consumer router? Whats the fun in that ;) hehehe and they all pretty much suck anyway..
With the use of pfsense, some smart switches and a real AP your on your way to very stable and robust network with lots of room for learning and play..
More than happy to help anyone learn no matter the age, I myself am no spring chicken anymore at 51.. Been in IT for 30+ years.. Before there was even tcp/ip hehehe.. We use to use ipx/spx, remember changing from old thinnet/thicknet cable to UTP… Rocking cat 3 ;) what a project that was.. Having to add the tcp stack to the windows 3.1 boxes running on 486 with math co processor installed... We were on the bleeding edge of tech heheeh ;)
-
oletuv after you get your pfsense setup with your Cisco layer 3 switch you will want to supply NTP from pfsense to your switch for time. It seems to work real well.
-
oletuv after you get your pfsense setup with your Cisco layer 3 switch you will want to supply NTP from pfsense to your switch for time. It seems to work real well.
Hi Cox,
Nice to see you on the forums again!
Thanks for the tip. I think I´ll setup a pfSense box in a couple of months, after moving in to my new apartment. :)
Ole
-
Before there was even tcp/ip hehehe.. We use to use ipx/spx, remember changing from old thinnet/thicknet cable to UTP… Rocking cat 3 ;) what a project that was.. Having to add the tcp stack to the windows 3.1 boxes running on 486 with math co processor installed...
Oh gawd, the days of "expensive" ISA NIC cards with undocumented IRQ dependencies - plug in a local LPT printer and the network goes down (shudder)….
-
You can not write network prefixes using shortcuts like that, you have to spell them out fully. Try 192.168.0.0/16 in the destination network field and it should work.
-
Also you don't need a /24 as a transit, you could just use a /30 - if you made it say 172.16.0/30 you could then just use a simple summary route 192.168/16 route to your networks on your L3 switch. Then no matter what 192.168 vlan you add to that switch you never have to touch your routes again.
When trying to add a 192.168/16 summary route I´m getting an "A valid IPv4 or IPv6 destination network must be specified." error.
I´m using the latest 2.3.2-DEVELOPMENT (amd64) version.
 -
Try 192.168.0.0 with a /16 netmask not 192.168
-
