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

    Policy-based Routing (outbound) and port forwarding (inbound) through WG tunnel

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved WireGuard
    30 Posts 7 Posters 4.6k 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.
    • H
      hypnosis4u2nv @kevindd992002
      last edited by

      @kevindd992002 They were unrelated to Wireguard. I had connectivity and routing issues with OpenVPN after updating to 2.5.0. Certain settings that got carried over needed additional tweaks and changes to connect. Then I ran into a routing issue where everything was routing through the client even though I had policy based rules set. After watching some videos and reading on some older posts. I found the culprit and fixed it. It may help to read/watch an unrelated topic to point out something you overlooked.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • K
        kevindd992002
        last edited by

        Ok, I did more testing today and it looks the workaround I did was also hit and miss! It solved the problem with some of my clients but when I add new PBR's and port forwarding rules, they don't work again! And like I said, the problem is not isolated to source IP's. It's also affecting the same client but with different destination IP's. For example, I have this PBR:

        63c7eb11-5570-4f3d-8b70-3976ee0345c3-image.png

        When I was troubleshooting a few days ago, this was not working until I implemented that outbound NAT workaround, so I thought all is good. When it worked, the destination Alias had these host entries:

        plex.tv
        www.addic7ed.com

        Today, I added a third host: news.newshosting.com and it never worked. So it's working for the first two but not for the new host. So go figure.

        @AB5G I'll raise a bug report today.

        A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • A
          AB5G @kevindd992002
          last edited by

          @kevindd992002 try clamping the MSS under the WG interface to 1420 (if you have an Ethernet uplink and see if that improves things). I saw on a unrelated thread that the MSS was causing some sites not to load (It still does not explain why the NAT wouldn't happen) - worth a try. Leave the MTU to default.

          K 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • K
            kevindd992002 @AB5G
            last edited by

            @ab5g I also read about that workaround somewhere when I was researching on this but I thought it was unrelated to my issue. I'll give it a try.

            K 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • K
              kevindd992002 @kevindd992002
              last edited by

              @AB5G setting the MSS field to 1420 (max mss 1380) in the WG interface on both sides didn't really help. Did it solve anything for you?

              A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • A
                AB5G @kevindd992002
                last edited by

                @kevindd992002 No it didn't - its a hit and miss (just like your's)

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • X
                  xparanoik
                  last edited by

                  This is somewhat related, but I changed my OpenVPN client for a wireguard tunnel, and in my PBR policy to route certain LAN clients through VPN I just switched the gateway from the old OpenVPN to the new WG one. Also updated my hybrid outbound NAT rules. Everything works just like it did before with OpenVPN.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • K
                    kevindd992002
                    last edited by

                    Filed a bug here.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • K
                      kevindd992002
                      last edited by

                      I'm using this WG package in pfsense 2.5.1 now and I have the same exact PBR issue! Do you guys have any progress with this? Or is it a pfsense issue?

                      K 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • K
                        kevindd992002 @kevindd992002
                        last edited by

                        I solved it! I didn't realize that WG allowed IP's also acted as a firewall for destination IP's for outbound. So if you want to route destination=Internet through the tunnel, you would have to add 0.0.0.0/0 to the allowed IP's on Site B.

                        WG reference: https://www.wireguard.com/#conceptual-overview

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