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

    2.5.1-RC port-forwarding not working on WAN2

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved NAT
    23 Posts 13 Posters 8.8k 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.
    • YanikY
      Yanik
      last edited by

      Same here!
      Port Forwards was working at 2.4.5 and 2.5.0 but after upgrade to 2.5.1 stopped working.

      2.5.1-RELEASE (amd64)
      built on Mon Apr 12 07:50:14 EDT 2021
      FreeBSD 12.2-STABLE

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • R
        ramikilany
        last edited by

        Same for me on two pfSense one cloud based and second on physical, just after the update to 2.5.1 the port forwarding suddenly stops and nothing changed in the settings, just update.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • R
          ramikilany @gkovachev
          last edited by

          @gkovachev same resolution here, for now I adjust my gateway to WAN2 as default, but it is not an ideal case. WAN1 is shared internet and WAN2 dedicated internet for server now all my company use the WAN2 internet.

          Waiting for solution for this issue.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • jimpJ
            jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
            last edited by

            https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/11805

            Remember: Upvote with the ๐Ÿ‘ button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

            Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

            Do not Chat/PM for help!

            custC X 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • L
              lasocean
              last edited by

              Same Issue since upgrading to 2.5.1 Release.
              Port Forwarding only works for interface if it's the current default gateway.
              Problem only with incoming traffic. Possible that traffic is try to return via the default gateway, instead of the interface it came in on.

              Outgoing traffic on that interface, per rules, works regardless of current default gateway.

              L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • L
                lasocean @lasocean
                last edited by

                @lasocean
                I was wrong.
                I have some rules that route certain devices via WAN2 primarily.
                Those devices are NOT getting connected to internet destinations when WAN is the default gateway.

                I had to Disable WAN2 to get them connecting via WAN.
                Marking WAN2 Gateway as DOWN also helped, but there were still some issues.

                All this worked fine with 2.5.0

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S
                  slu
                  last edited by slu

                  The question is now, downgrade to 2.5.0 or is there a patch/hotfix possible.
                  As far I understand this thread there is no workaround possible -at the moment-.

                  pfSense Gold subscription

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • E
                    ed-tech
                    last edited by

                    i have same issue with 2.5.1

                    J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • J
                      j.sejo1 @ed-tech
                      last edited by

                      @edmond https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/11805

                      Pfsense - Bacula - NagiosZabbix - Zimbra - AlienVault
                      Hardening Linux
                      Telegram: @vtlbackupbacula
                      http://www.smartitbc.com/en/contact.html

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • L
                        lennok
                        last edited by

                        Glad I found this discussion after some digging.

                        Same issue here. Why is this not listed in "known issues" yet!?
                        Seems discovered more than a week ago already. How long is suggested we wait before updating then?

                        This is very crucial to fix because we need NAT on all our WANS (7!). This is the real nightmare situation I always wanted to avoid again by moving to pfsense. At least this does not affect the built-in OpenVPNs.

                        Rollback is currently impossible since nobody can access the device for the next weeks. I hope "urgent" means top priority here.

                        J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • J
                          j.sejo1 @lennok
                          last edited by

                          @lennok said in 2.5.1-RC port-forwarding not working on WAN2:

                          Glad I found this discussion after some digging.
                          Same issue here. Why is this not listed in "known issues" yet!?
                          Seems discovered more than a week ago already. How long is suggested we wait before updating then?
                          This is very crucial to fix because we need NAT on all our WANS (7!). This is the real nightmare situation I always wanted to avoid again by moving to pfsense. At least this does not affect the built-in OpenVPNs.
                          Rollback is currently impossible since nobody can access the device for the next weeks. I hope "urgent" means top priority here.

                          Hopefully the answer is not: you have to pay for pfsense Plus +

                          It is not being critical or pointing. But it is delicate because it is something of the essence of the FIRWEWALL.

                          It's like an update fails the blocking rules and everything is ANY .... = (

                          Pfsense - Bacula - NagiosZabbix - Zimbra - AlienVault
                          Hardening Linux
                          Telegram: @vtlbackupbacula
                          http://www.smartitbc.com/en/contact.html

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • custC
                            cust @jimp
                            last edited by

                            This post is deleted!
                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • X
                              xparanoik @jimp
                              last edited by

                              @jimp does this bug currently exist on the upstream kernel?

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • coldfire7C
                                coldfire7
                                last edited by

                                There is also another issue in 2.5.1.
                                If a rule is created with a specified gateway (not a failover or load-balanced gw) and that gateway goes down, data starts flowing through the default gateway. In 2.4.5 this wasn't the case.
                                If anyone is wondering Skip rules when gateway is down is unchecked.

                                Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • Bob.DigB
                                  Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @coldfire7
                                  last edited by

                                  @coldfire7 No, that is and was the default behavior before.

                                  coldfire7C 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • coldfire7C
                                    coldfire7 @Bob.Dig
                                    last edited by

                                    @bob-dig but when I was using 2.4.5 if a GW went down I was getting timed out instead. :S

                                    Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • Bob.DigB
                                      Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @coldfire7
                                      last edited by

                                      @coldfire7 I am sure about it, because I had to create a vpn killswitch for that, so... ๐Ÿ˜Š

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