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

    [SOLVED] Another lame OpenVPN client <-> LAN no access thread

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved OpenVPN
    15 Posts 4 Posters 3.3k 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.
    • johnpozJ
      johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
      last edited by

      And what about the firewall running on the clients your trying to access?  Out of the box windows for example blocks access from devices that are not on its same local network.  Your vpn clients would not be on the same local network as your boxes..

      This is like 1st thing to look into when you can not access stuff..

      An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
      If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
      Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
      SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • D
        deajan
        last edited by

        Yep, I had AV / windows firewall disabled for my tests, didn't mention it because I kinda lost my mind on this today.

        I've noticed some VERY strange behavior when using tracert under windows (sorry for the french console output):

        
        C:\Windows\system32>tracert 172.16.1.1
        
        Détermination de l'itinéraire vers somelan.local [172.16.1.1]
        avec un maximum de 30 sauts :
        
          1    74 ms    76 ms    70 ms  somelan.local [172.16.1.1]
        
        Itinéraire déterminé.
        
        C:\Windows\system32>tracert 172.16.1.9
        
        Détermination de l'itinéraire vers 172.16.1.9 avec un maximum de 30 sauts.
        
          1    83 ms    89 ms    70 ms  192.168.1.1
          2   125 ms     *      142 ms  reverse-dns-of-my-pfsense2-wan [XX.XX.XX.XX]
          3     *        *        *     Délai d'attente de la demande dépassé.
          4     *        *        *     Délai d'attente de la demande dépassé.
          5     *        *     ^C
        C:\Windows\system32>
        
        

        I don't have any 192.168.1.0/24 net anywhere.
        Double checked with ipconfig and route print on the windows machine.
        Routing magic ?

        NetPOWER.fr - some opensource stuff for IT people

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • johnpozJ
          johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
          last edited by

          1    83 ms    89 ms    70 ms  192.168.1.1

          Clearly you do! ;)

          An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
          If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
          Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
          SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • D
            divsys
            last edited by

            That looks suspiciously like a WAN gateway IP you'd get when your behind another DSL router.
            Are you sure your DSL is actually "bridged"?
            What's the first two octets of your WAN IP?

            -jfp

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • johnpozJ
              johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
              last edited by

              Why would you ever see pfsense wan IP in this trace either..  That would never show up with rfc1918 address as hop before that..  And if had a tunnel going, for sure never ever see your wan IP in the trace.

              An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
              If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
              Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
              SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • D
                deajan
                last edited by

                Indeed, yesterday I've tried to connect to another of my pfSense boxes that is behind a router with 192.168.1.0/24 network and forgot to switch back.

                So far so good, tracert seems better when connecting to the pfSense I described above (which is bridged to a WAN modem).

                
                C:\Windows\system32>tracert 172.16.1.1
                
                Détermination de l'itinéraire vers partdieu-wifi.dghotels.local [172.16.1.1]
                avec un maximum de 30 sauts :
                
                  1    85 ms    71 ms    66 ms  partdieu-wifi.dghotels.local [172.16.1.1]
                
                Itinéraire déterminé.
                
                C:\Windows\system32>tracert 172.16.1.3
                
                Détermination de l'itinéraire vers 172.16.1.3 avec un maximum de 30 sauts.
                
                  1    47 ms    48 ms    48 ms  10.13.37.1
                  2     *        *        *     Délai d'attente de la demande dépassé.
                  3     *        *        *     Délai d'attente de la demande dépassé.
                  4     *        *        *     Délai d'attente de la demande dépassé.
                  5     *        *        *     Délai d'attente de la demande dépassé.
                  6     *        *        *     Délai d'attente de la demande dépassé.
                  7     *     ^C
                
                

                Routing table still seems to have the right 172.16.0.0/16 network

                
                IPv4 Table de routage
                ===========================================================================
                Itinéraires actifs :
                Destination réseau    Masque réseau  Adr. passerelle   Adr. interface Métrique
                          0.0.0.0          0.0.0.0   10.210.100.254    10.210.100.47     10
                          0.0.0.0        128.0.0.0       10.13.37.1       10.13.37.2     20
                       10.13.37.0    255.255.255.0         On-link        10.13.37.2    276
                       10.13.37.2  255.255.255.255         On-link        10.13.37.2    276
                     10.13.37.255  255.255.255.255         On-link        10.13.37.2    276
                     10.210.100.0    255.255.255.0         On-link     10.210.100.47    266
                    10.210.100.47  255.255.255.255         On-link     10.210.100.47    266
                   10.210.100.255  255.255.255.255         On-link     10.210.100.47    266
                    [public ip pfSense2]  255.255.255.255   10.210.100.254    10.210.100.47     10
                        127.0.0.0        255.0.0.0         On-link         127.0.0.1    306
                        127.0.0.1  255.255.255.255         On-link         127.0.0.1    306
                  127.255.255.255  255.255.255.255         On-link         127.0.0.1    306
                        128.0.0.0        128.0.0.0       10.13.37.1       10.13.37.2     20
                       172.16.0.0      255.255.0.0       10.13.37.1       10.13.37.2     20
                        224.0.0.0        240.0.0.0         On-link         127.0.0.1    306
                        224.0.0.0        240.0.0.0         On-link     10.210.100.47    266
                        224.0.0.0        240.0.0.0         On-link        10.13.37.2    276
                  255.255.255.255  255.255.255.255         On-link         127.0.0.1    306
                  255.255.255.255  255.255.255.255         On-link     10.210.100.47    266
                  255.255.255.255  255.255.255.255         On-link        10.13.37.2    276
                ===========================================================================
                
                

                I've enabled "Log packets that are handled by this rule" on the OpenVPN interface in pfSense, and the packets seem to reach the LAN.

                
                (Pass) Jun 22 14:25:00	ovpns1	  10.13.37.2	  172.16.1.3	ICMP
                
                

                So it seems that my windows client can reach the LAN, but doesn't get a reponse.

                NetPOWER.fr - some opensource stuff for IT people

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • johnpozJ
                  johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                  last edited by

                  yeah you need to check the lan box your trying to ping and see where its sending the response if it is, is it possible your windows machine has a different gateway then the pfsense box your vpn tunnel is coming in on.

                  Easy enough to sniff on the lan box to see if its actually seeing the ping and what it does about it.

                  An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                  If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                  Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                  SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • D
                    deajan
                    last edited by

                    Okay, well… sometimes a good sleeping night should be considered before posting.

                    Most of the devices I need to remotely access aren't computers but switches and WAPs.
                    Some of the switches (which I had the luck to pick) don't have gateways setup.
                    And on top of this, the remote computer I was playing with has been shutdown while I was using it as "working reference" !!! (going crazy).
                    So actually everything worked perfectly with my initial setup, just no luck with the devices I was pinging.

                    In the end, as my setup is supposed to be more a tech VPN to remotely access network equipment, I ended up trading the tun for a tap setup, so I get a nice bridge and can access devices that don't have gateways setup.

                    Thanks for the help.

                    NetPOWER.fr - some opensource stuff for IT people

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • K
                      kpa
                      last edited by

                      The proper solution is to use outbound NAT (on the interface where the said devices are connected to) to access devices that don't have a gateway option.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • D
                        deajan
                        last edited by

                        Is there an advantage of using a outgoing NAT vs TAP bridge ?

                        NetPOWER.fr - some opensource stuff for IT people

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • johnpozJ
                          johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                          last edited by

                          why sort of crap device does not have option for a gateway?? They must be the cheapest of the cheapest devices designed for home use only..  Any device work 2 cents that has the option for ip management would have option for gateway..

                          An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                          If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                          Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                          SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • D
                            deajan
                            last edited by

                            Well, in my use case (not road warrior but remote access to switches etc), it's just brilliant to get broadcast etc.

                            NetPOWER.fr - some opensource stuff for IT people

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • johnpozJ
                              johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                              last edited by

                              huh??  Accessing switches and broadcast have to do with each other how??

                              An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                              If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                              Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                              SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • D
                                deajan
                                last edited by

                                Being in the same local lan is a lot easier for my tasks, which don't require any road warrior worker setup  8)

                                NetPOWER.fr - some opensource stuff for IT people

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