CARP Network Allocation Problem



  • My setup is like this:

    WAN: Two /24 networks 192.168.1.0 and 192.10.50.0 (On the same cable)
    LAN: A /23 network 10.10.10.0
    DMZ: Bridged with WAN

    In order for the 192.10.50.0 to work and route packets i allocated this network using a ProxyARP on 1 out of 2 pfsenses. (And it works, as it should)
    I have set CARP adresses on both LAN and WAN, and although they sync settings, and CARP is working as it should, i can only access to DMZ and WAN when 1 out of 2 pfsenses are disconnected.
    Each one works individually, but not together.

    So, i need to resolve 2 problems in order to get a full redudant firewall.

    1. How can i solve the issue with the firewalls not working together?

    2. I read this https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=45209.msg240929#msg240929 but i don't understand how i am supposed to set it up, and which IP i will set as CARP, since i cannot create a CARP network


  • LAYER 8 Netgate

    Bridging is completely incompatible with pfSense CARP/HA. If you choose to go down that path it is incumbent upon you to make sure all of the necessary spanning-tree pieces are in the right place.

    WAN: Two /24 networks 192.168.1.0 and 192.10.50.0 (On the same cable)

    This is also asking for trouble. Seems it has found you.



  • Unfortunately, it is necessary for me to use bridge as the IPs of the devices i have on my DMZ need to match the WAN's IP.
    So, bridge and CARP are not gonna work?

    Yes, also the situation with 2 networks on one cable cannot change..  :-[


  • LAYER 8 Netgate

    It can work, but it's on you to prevent any loops. I am not going down that rabbit hole. Design your network properly.



  • Ok, i see.
    Trust me, if i could, i would design it properly.
    And how could i prevent loops?
    Can you give me a link or something to read about it?


  • LAYER 8 Netgate

    I find it humorous that you would be concentrating on HA before fixing such a broken design. If it is worth high-availability it is worth a solid design first.

    You prevent layer 2 loops using spanning-tree protocol



  • It is humorous, indeed.
    But still, not in my powers to change this.
    You wouldn't understand.
    But thank you very much for your time.
    I will try to see if HA can be achived, otherwise a cloned machine will be standing by, in case of a hardware failure.


  • LAYER 8 Netgate

    I understand perfectly.

    It is those who are making you do this who don't understand.



  • @Derelict:

    It is those who are making you do this who don't understand.

    Yep.
    I guess i am not the only one.


Log in to reply