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

    Firewall blocks outgoing OpenVPN traffic to not local network (solved)

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Firewalling
    20 Posts 3 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.
    • J Offline
      Jürgen Garbe
      last edited by

      Because of the fact, that we use static client addresses (client specific configuration of OpenVPN) and having more then 256 Clients we decide to use this 10.6.0.0/16 network…
      And of course we added Firewall-1 as gateway to the Intranet (192.168.0.0/24) and the corresponding route in Firewall-2 (which are noth pfSense instances.

      What I not understand:
      If pfSense blocks rfc1918 (aka private networks?) out of the box, why does it not block the pakets coming from the Edgerouter (source = 192.168.100.2). This is a private network too?

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

        The "out of the box" blocking of rfc1918 addresses only applies to incoming connections (initiated from the outside) on the WAN interface. On any other interface you have to check the option yourself.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • J Offline
          Jürgen Garbe
          last edited by

          I see.
          But for incoming traffic, the OpenVPN wizard automatically added a rule (source: *, destination: WAN - OpenVPN port).
          And incoming traffic was not the problem (I could see the incoming packets in the OpenVPN log both from 192.168.0.0 and 192.168.100.0).
          BUT: the outgoing packets in direction to 192.168.0.0 are filtered in 'out of box configuration' by the firewall component, the packets to 192.168.100 not!
          That is, what I do not understand…

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

            No the outbound connections would not be blocked.. Post up your wan rules on your vpn pfsense. Also you turned off natting on the firewall-1?

            I am talking about routes on your vpn box… His gateway is what?  You added a route so he knows to talk to firewall-1 to get to 192.168.0

            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 25.07 | Lab VMs 2.8, 25.07

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • J Offline
              Jürgen Garbe
              last edited by

              I have appended screenshots of the Extranet (=WAN interface) rules, the gateways and the one static route so that the outgoing packets can be routed back to the 192.168.0.0 net.
              I am allways talking about Firewall-2 (the VPN box).
              Please believe me, I checked the traffic on the WAN interface using the integrated packet capture functionality:
              If I disable the firewall functionality, I see the outgoing packets, if I enable it, they are gone (filtered) - the incoming packets an be seen in any case.
              Only if I add the floating rule shown in the last screen shot, everything is working as expected - I can see the outgoing packets again!

              Extranet.png
              Extranet.png_thumb
              Gateways.png
              Gateways.png_thumb
              Route.png
              Route.png_thumb
              Disable.png
              Disable.png_thumb
              Floating.png
              Floating.png_thumb

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

                Why would you set your wan rules to "this firewall" when it would be the wan or extranet address as you have renamed it address as the dest for allowing access to vpn.

                What rule(s) do you have in your openvpn interface?

                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 25.07 | Lab VMs 2.8, 25.07

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • J Offline
                  Jürgen Garbe
                  last edited by

                  I set my wan rules to "this firewall" instead of extranet address just as a try. But it really makes no difference.
                  Please find appended the rules of the openvpn interface (RA1 tecs is an Alias for the addresses 10.6.0.1 … 10.6.0.254).

                  OpenVPNrules.png
                  OpenVPNrules.png_thumb

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • J Offline
                    Jürgen Garbe
                    last edited by

                    Any further hints or questions?
                    Is it possible to get some logs with info, which (maybe internal/intrinsic) rule filters the outgoing packets?

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • J Offline
                      Jürgen Garbe
                      last edited by

                      Some news:

                      1. I am very sad that I am not able to find any hint in the logs of the firewall…
                      2. But I played a little bit around and found out that setting the option "Disable reply-to" also solves the problem (although I do not complety understand this option - any hints are welcome)! :o
                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • johnpozJ Offline
                        johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                        last edited by

                        "any hints are welcome"

                        Yeah Fix your asymmetrical mess and you wouldn't have to disable reply-to..

                        https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Asymmetric_Routing_and_Firewall_Rules

                        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 25.07 | Lab VMs 2.8, 25.07

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • J Offline
                          Jürgen Garbe
                          last edited by

                          Believe me: I really appreciate any hint but can't see in my case, where the hell I use asymmetric routing:
                          The client A packets (out of the net 192.168.0.0) are routed through GW B (Firewall-1: 192.168.0.200, 192.168.100.200) to the pfSense instance C (Firewall-2 with the OpenVPN service running: 192.168.100.219).
                          And I think the corresponding "answer" packets are going the same way back (C->B->A), because there is a static route defined in Firewall-2 (C) to direct packets for 192.168.0.0 to GW B!
                          Where is my mistake, or in other words: where is the asymetric routing?
                          Best regards!

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

                            lets see the traceroutes..

                            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 25.07 | Lab VMs 2.8, 25.07

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • J Offline
                              Jürgen Garbe
                              last edited by

                              That helped!
                              The tracert executed on Firewall-2 clearly showed, that packets in direction of 192.168.0.0 are send to the standard-GW, completly ignoring the defined static route for this case…
                              It seems, that the firewall on the correspondig interface ("Extranet", 192.168.100.219) ignores the static route and only sends packets to its upstream gateway.
                              Is there any reason/explanations for dummies like me, why the WAN interface is only working with its one and only upstream gateway and is ignoring the static route?
                              Best regards!

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • J Offline
                                Jürgen Garbe
                                last edited by

                                Finally got it solved!
                                At first many thanks to johnpoz to ask the right questions! :)

                                After learning, what is a transit network (here: my 192.168.100.0/24), how to use tracert, and what is asymmetric routing I finally realized the core misadjustment in my setup: I saw before (and asked, why could it be…) that my static routes just were ignored.
                                That brought me the solution: I just had to remove the gateway entry in the Extranet-IF settings (now: none) and everything worked as expected!

                                Now I have learned, that setting a gateway in the interface settings makes the pfSense instance ignoring other gateways and their routes on this interface...

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