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

    Routing between subnets/interfaces

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Firewalling
    8 Posts 3 Posters 8.5k 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.
    • S Offline
      spartasolutions
      last edited by

      Ex.
      LAN Bridge LAN + WIFI(ath0_wlan0): 192.168.2.1
      Devices ath0_wlan1: 192.168.30.1

      Due to our desire to have subnet specific content filtering rules, how would we be able to get these two networks to communicate with each other? i.e. An end user on the LAN interface could communicate with their chromecast or other smart devices attached to the devices network.

      It's probably not a hard task, but my pfsense box is acting up. Currently:

      Device on LAN can ping: 192.168.2.1 (obviously), 192.168.30.1, but not a device on the other subnet 192.168.30.20
      Device on Devices can ping: 192.168.30.1 and 192.168.2.1 but not the device on the lan, 192.168.2.20

      Thanks for the help everyone!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • DerelictD Offline
        Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
        last edited by

        Sounds like the rules are correct (since you can ping the other interface addresses). Maybe something on the local hosts not allowing pings from other subnets?

        Traffic capture for ICMP from the source host on the destination interface. If you see the pings going out and no reply, it's something on the target host.

        Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
        A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
        DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
        Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • S Offline
          spartasolutions
          last edited by

          So here's some updates:

          1. The WLAN continues to be re-recognized as a new, public network. (think we're not connecting to Atheros 13 (SSID is Atheros), this increments every couple of days and the box is recognized as a new network

          2. We've located the cause of the issue. Firstly, our network setup is as follows (we've disabled some interfaces to make it easier to diagnose.

          OS: pfSense 2.3.1 (10-3 STABLE)
          Wireless Card: Atheros AR9380

          WAN - igb0 (obvious) - outbound IP address
          LAN - BRIDGE0 (LANPORT + WIFI) - 192.168.2.0
          WIFI - ath0 (using an Atheros AR9380) - None
          LANPORT - igb1 [the lan itself] - None

          -Firewall Rules

          Bridge Members
          WIFI: Pass IPV4 | any |  any
          LANPORT: Pass IPv4 | any | any

          Bridge Interface
          LAN: Pass IPv4 | LAN net | any
                  Pass IPv4 | LANPORT net | any
                  Pass IPv4 | WIFI net | any
                  Block IPv4+IPv6 | any | any | any (default block)

          Current working pings:

          WIFI device to LANPORT device

          Not working pings:

          LANPORT to WIFI
          WIFI to WIFI
          (have not checked LANPORT to LANPORT yet, will do)

          Here's the kicker: the issue is Windows Firewall. Specifically, it's not recognizing these bridged networks as the same "local subnet".  When I disabled Windows Firewall everything worked well. Then, just for fun, I enabled ICMP IPv4 Inbound Echo Requests (ping in) for all "remote IP addresses" instead of "local subnet". Voila, ping works.

          So I guess it's turned into a larger problem of: Why isn't this bridge working? All devices have the same default gateway regardless of interface. Seems very bizarre to me.

          Hope someone has some insight into how to get this resolved!

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • DerelictD Offline
            Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
            last edited by

            Windows firewall doesn't care about layer 2, only layer 3.

            If the ip address is outside the local subnet as the host sees it, it is not on the local subnet.

            Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
            A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
            DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
            Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • S Offline
              spartasolutions
              last edited by

              All devices have a default gateway of 192.168.2.1 and have received their IP addresses from DHCP.

              The bridged network is 192.168.2.1/24.

              So, I don't quite know what you're saying; it works with windows firewall disabled and it doesn't when it's enabled. That's what I've figured out and am asking help resolve

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

                "BRIDGE0 (LANPORT + WIFI) - 192.168.2.0"

                So your saying all your devices on this bridge are on this 192.168.2/24 network??

                But your windows firewall is blocking the traffic?  But if you allow ""remote IP addresses" instead of "local subnet"" then it works??

                That makes zero sense, so we must be missing someinfo..  So your client that is on wifi gets a 192.168.2/24 address.  And it tries to ping something on the bridge network of 192.168.2/24 and the windows firewall blocks this because it thinks its an outside network??

                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 25.07.1 | Lab VMs 2.8.1, 25.07.1

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S Offline
                  spartasolutions
                  last edited by

                  Absolutely that's what was happening. Two clients, attached to the bridged networks via two separate interfaces (LAN for one, WIFI for the other).

                  However, I've really just about had it with the wireless card. After testing the same routes with an AP installed, there were no issues with communication across the bridged network. Just another L for wireless cards and pfSense.

                  Regardless, thanks for the help. It was definitely a weird situation that I might look into again if I ever need to have a wireless card in the box.

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

                    "if I ever need to have a wireless card in the box."

                    If that was ever the case you would be doing it wrong ;)  If you want wifi, then get AP - get multiple AP if the area you need to cover warrants..  I really can not think of situation where the router would be properly placed for wifi coverage of any area..  Unless you have place your router in the ceiling in the center of the area you want to cover with wifi ;)

                    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 25.07.1 | Lab VMs 2.8.1, 25.07.1

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