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

NAT Duplication?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved NAT
3 Posts 2 Posters 1.0k 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.
  • M
    mlimo
    last edited by Jul 21, 2016, 10:56 AM Jul 21, 2016, 10:44 AM

    I have a ProxyARP range of addresses attached to my WAN service.

    I have designated this as the IP address for a terminal server.

    I have created a 1:1 rule - so the Terminal server presents this IP if i go to whatsmyip.org etc

    I am making a port forwarding NAT rule for RDP as follows

    Incoming port 33390 -> Internal IP address, port 3389.
    My problem is, now both ports are answering
    I can connect to the terminal server on 33390 and 3389
    See attached graphics for the NAT Rule and WAN firewall Rule

    What am i missing, this type of rule used to work with 2.2 series.

    I have tried the rule without the associated firewall rule, and it wouldnt connect.
    pf1.jpg
    pf1.jpg_thumb
    pf2.jpg
    pf2.jpg_thumb
    pf3.jpg
    pf3.jpg_thumb

    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
    • C
      cmb
      last edited by Jul 21, 2016, 9:14 PM

      Where you have a 1:1 NAT and a port forward like that, the rule that allows traffic through the port forward will also allow traffic through the 1:1 NAT. That's how it's always worked, just the nature of how pf functions since the translation applies first for WAN rules.

      If you specify the "pass" option in the port forward, so there is no associated firewall rule, that should keep it restricted to only the high port you're port forwarding through.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • M
        mlimo
        last edited by Jul 23, 2016, 4:08 AM

        Hi CMB,

        Thanks for the reply.

        I have already tried the NAT without the rule, with no success.
        Perhaps something with the ProxyARP IP address.

        It does seem to work OK directly on the WAN ip address

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        3 out of 3
        • First post
          3/3
          Last post
        Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.
          This community forum collects and processes your personal information.
          consent.not_received