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

    Routing between WAN and LAN

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Routing and Multi WAN
    34 Posts 5 Posters 9.5k 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.
    • B
      brandon-lizard @bingo600
      last edited by

      @bingo600

      I do have 3 netcards available, yes. My pfsense is actually running in proxmox. I also have a nas and pbx. I'd like those to all be on the 10.47.2.0 network.

      johnpozJ bingo600B 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • johnpozJ
        johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @brandon-lizard
        last edited by

        @brandon-lizard said in Routing between WAN and LAN:

        My pfsense is actually running in proxmox

        Yeah another complexity..

        Which you left off your drawing.

        I suggest you just do the double nat setup.. Which will work just fine, and would be default out of the box setup for pfsense.

        Only thing you have to do is as mentioned turn off the block rfc1918 rule, and setup your port forwards for stuff you want lan1 to access on lan2.

        https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/nat/port-forwards.html

        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
        • bingo600B
          bingo600 @brandon-lizard
          last edited by

          @brandon-lizard

          Then i suggest you move the 10.47.1.x network "behind/into" the pfSense.
          Tip: Keep all 10.47.x.x networks behind the pfSense (makes life easier).

          And make a 192.168.47.0/14 network as Transit.

          Now you can still restrict the 10.47.1.x devices via pfSense rules , if 10.47.2.x devices needs to be "protected". And you don't have to bother with portforwarding , as 10.47.1.x is now "behind/inside pfSense".

          If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "thumbs up"

          pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

          QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
          CPUĀ  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
          LANĀ  : 4 x Intel 211, DiskĀ  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

          V 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • bingo600B
            bingo600
            last edited by

            @johnpoz

            Sorry ... for making another suggestion 😊

            If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "thumbs up"

            pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

            QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
            CPUĀ  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
            LANĀ  : 4 x Intel 211, DiskĀ  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

            johnpozJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • johnpozJ
              johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @bingo600
              last edited by

              Yeah removing devices off the network being used between linksys and pfsense, would be a better solution yes. And would remove the need to port forward for his networks behind pfsense.

              But I have a sneaky suspicion he also has wireless devices connecting to his linksys router that would not be able to access anything behind pfsense without port forwards.

              If was me, I would ditch the linksys as a router and just use it as an AP. And use pfsense for all his routing needs. Pfsense would get his public IP on its wan.. And all his networks would be behind pfsense.

              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

              bingo600B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • bingo600B
                bingo600 @brandon-lizard
                last edited by

                @brandon-lizard

                If you want to access the NAS or other "inside" devices from the internet.
                Then just do the portforwards as @johnpoz says , you'll have to do them anyway.

                I'd still suggest using a 192.168.47.0 as the "linksys (transit) net".

                To keep the 10.47.x.x/16 net "inside" the firewall.

                If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "thumbs up"

                pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

                QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
                CPUĀ  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
                LANĀ  : 4 x Intel 211, DiskĀ  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • V
                  viragomann @bingo600
                  last edited by

                  @bingo600 said in Routing between WAN and LAN:

                  Then i suggest you move the 10.47.1.x network "behind/into" the pfSense.

                  @brandon-lizard Yeah, I would put all behind pfSense and kick the Linksys.
                  Don't scruple due to virtualization. My home main router (pfSense) runs on KVM as well since more than 3 years and does its job very well.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • bingo600B
                    bingo600 @johnpoz
                    last edited by

                    @johnpoz said in Routing between WAN and LAN:

                    But I have a sneaky suspicion he also has wireless devices connecting to his linksys router that would not be able to access anything behind pfsense without port forwards.

                    Ah I didn't see that one comming šŸ‘

                    If was me, I would ditch the linksys as a router and just use it as an AP. And use pfsense for all his routing needs. Pfsense would get his public IP on its wan.. And all his networks would be behind pfsense.

                    That would be an "elegant" solution , if you "trust" Proxmox to be "Wan".

                    If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "thumbs up"

                    pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

                    QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
                    CPUĀ  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
                    LANĀ  : 4 x Intel 211, DiskĀ  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

                    B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • B
                      brandon-lizard @bingo600
                      last edited by brandon-lizard

                      Sorry for not putting in the details. didn't think it mattered.

                      Yes, that's the easiest solution to put everything behind pfsense.

                      But, my hubby will get mad if anything goes down. I was trying not to have the whole network depend on pfsense.

                      bingo600B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • bingo600B
                        bingo600 @brandon-lizard
                        last edited by bingo600

                        @brandon-lizard

                        If the pfSense goes down , then you won't be able to access the devices on 10.47.2.0/24 from the linksys 10.47.1.0/24 anyways.

                        Then why bother accessing them at all from the "linksys" net.

                        Keep what you have.
                        And if pfSense goes down ,"teach the hubby" to move the cable from switch2 to switch1.

                        Or do you have wireless on the linksys , and that's what the hubby is using ?

                        Edit: Sounds like @johnpoz portforwarding is a winner anyway.
                        I'd still suggest the "All behind pfSense" way.

                        Maybe even get another wireless device to put "behind" the pfSense.
                        Then Hubby can connect to SSID "Inside" when wanting to use the NAS etc ... And SSID "Outside (Linksys wifi)" if pfSense goes down.

                        /Bingo

                        If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "thumbs up"

                        pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

                        QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
                        CPUĀ  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
                        LANĀ  : 4 x Intel 211, DiskĀ  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

                        B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • B
                          brandon-lizard @bingo600
                          last edited by

                          @bingo600 Yes, the linksys router is a wireless router that he uses. that router runs our main network (10.47.1.0/24) .

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • bingo600B
                            bingo600
                            last edited by bingo600

                            @johnpoz
                            Can i get the brand & model of your "Crystall ball" šŸ¤•
                            I want one

                            @brandon-lizard
                            If you can get/buy another wireless device , you could have 2 SSID's.
                            Existing Linksys (for emergency) when pfSense is down.
                            New device for "Normal use" connected to the NAS Lan

                            /Bingo

                            If you find my answer useful - Please give the post a šŸ‘ - "thumbs up"

                            pfSense+ 23.05.1 (ZFS)

                            QOTOM-Q355G4 Quad Lan.
                            CPUĀ  : Core i5 5250U, Ram : 8GB Kingston DDR3LV 1600
                            LANĀ  : 4 x Intel 211, DiskĀ  : 240G SAMSUNG MZ7L3240HCHQ SSD

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • B
                              brandon-lizard
                              last edited by

                              OK. Here is what I’m going to do. Thanks everyone for your input, I really appreciate it.

                              With T-Mobile, I just realized I have an internet gateway modem, in addition to my cable modem from Comcast. T-mobile gateway isn’t being used at all right now.

                              I will use the internet coming from t-mobile as the WAN, and then plug in my two lans. LAN1 and LAN2. I will use three nics.

                              This should make things easier routing between LAN1 and 2 now right?

                              B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • B
                                brandon-lizard @brandon-lizard
                                last edited by

                                Never-mind. That gateway doesn’t work like a cable modem does. So I ran into a pickle.

                                All I am wanting to do is separate my two networks, having the ability to route between them, and sharing internet.

                                Why does this have to be so hard?

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

                                  @brandon-lizard said in Routing between WAN and LAN:

                                  Why does this have to be so hard?

                                  Its not hard... You have been given multiple options..

                                  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
                                  • First post
                                    Last post
                                  Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.