HELP NEEDED - OPENVPN NO LAN ACCESS!!***
-
@viragomann This is exactly the fix for me. I spent hours trying to figure out where the stop was.
Thank you. -
This post is deleted! -
@viragomann said in HELP NEEDED - OPENVPN NO LAN ACCESS!!***:
If you do NAT, the source address in packets coming from a VPN client and destined to a LAN device is translated to the routers LAN address. So the device sees the packets coming from its own network segment and will trust the access.
It's not difficult to enable it: Go to Firewall > NAT > Outbound, if you've never changed the NAT mode it will still be in automatic rule gen mode, so change it to hybrid mode and save this.
Then add a new NAT rule:
Interface: LAN
Source: Network - 10.120.0.0/24 (your VPN tunnel subnet)
Leave all other options at their defaults, just enter a description and save it.This solved my problem. Thank you very much
-
@viragomann 10x. Hours on google and your solution make my day. NETGATE should advertise this solution.
-
@fabiancj said in HELP NEEDED - OPENVPN NO LAN ACCESS!!***:
NETGATE should advertise this solution.
Don't agree. It's only a workaround at the end. I'd only recommend it if there is no other way to communicate with the remote device, like no gateway option on the device.
But I don't approve to use NAT to bypass firewall restictions on the destination device as lang as there is an ability to add the needed rules to it. -
Hi everyone! I just wanted to pitch in what worked for me when I ran into this problem. Perhaps this wasn't exactly the problem that any of you experienced, but it might be one more thing to consider when troubleshooting.
In my case, I unknowingly set up my VPN server to use TCP, rather than UDP. Using the wizard, I thereby automatically generated a firewall rule for that VPN server that specified TCP.
After reading through some other posts, I figured that I couldn't get access to my LAN subnet because I was trying to use TCP. So, I switched over my VPN server to UDP (and eventually figured out I also needed to change the firewall rule to UDP as well), and I finally was able to access my LAN subnet.
I don't know if this is really a solution, but it's ultimately what got my setup working how I wanted it to. Perhaps someone with more technical knowledge could explain why it wouldn't work on TCP (or why it should have).
-
What your vpn connection used be it tcp or udp had nothing to do with access to lan devices..
-
@fabiancj said in HELP NEEDED - OPENVPN NO LAN ACCESS!!***:
NETGATE should advertise this solution.
They do.. Its right there in the documentation..
I am with @viragomann really.. This shouldn't be a common sort of setup. And really shouldn't be used to circumvent some devices local firewall. It is a work around for devices that do not support a gateway - say some IP camera or something. Or if you have a scenario where a device is using a different gateway.. Which is the location in the docs where its mentioned.
Normally this would not be something needed in your typical remote vpn access.
But basic understanding of networking and the concept of how natting works in general, this sort of work around would be quite apparent.. I have suggested this sort of work around many times in many different threads.
-
@johnpoz I figured it shouldn’t matter, but is there any reason you can think of that would explain why it worked?
-
@viragomann
OMG I have been trying to get it worked since long time, thanks alot your solution worked !!! -
@viragomann You are a Genius Thanks. works perfectly for me!!
-
@viragomann Dude, thanks so much for this, i have been banging my head for 3 days now trying to get this to work
-
Hello,
The NAT workaround helped me as well. But its bugging me that its a workaround.
What would be the proper sollution to this?
My problem was with an Androind phone. I dont have much configuration options on it so would prefer to do it on the pfsense router side. -
@blyb said in HELP NEEDED - OPENVPN NO LAN ACCESS!!***:
What would be the proper sollution to this?
Proper routing and firewall rules.. If your vpn client that is remote gets a "vpn" ip of say 192.168.1.x/24 and he wants to talk to a client on your network say 192.168.2.x/24, the firewall on this 192.168.2 device should allow 192.168.1.x to talk to it on whatever ports you want it to talk to it on. And this 192.168.2 device should know to send the traffic back to pfsense to get back to the 192.168.1 device.
Source natting your vpn client so it looks like its talking to the 192.168.2 device from the 192.168.2.y pfsense IP is not proper routing or firewalling its a way to let the 192.168.2 device your trying to talk to from your vpn that your on the same network as it.. So it doesn't need to use pfsense as its default gateway or have route to use pfsense 192.168.2.y IP to get to the 192.168.1 network.
This can be a work around for something like an iot camera or something that doesn't allow you to set a gateway or routes.
But it would could be used to trick the devices firewall into thinking hey this traffic is local to you, not remote so you don't need to block it - all depends on the devices firewall settings or if it has one.
This should not be normal operation, but a method of getting something to work that can not work with normal routing and firewall rules.
-
@johnpoz Hello,
Thanks for the answer.
I actualy came here to asnwer my own questionas (for future readers), I just learned waht you wrote.In my case I also had an additional problem on my network. I already had a VPN (10.8.0.0/24) on my old debian server that is to be replaced by a new server hosting pfsense. And by mistake I reused the same 10.8.0.0/24 network config for new VPN. That seamed to cause my issue. After tinkering with:
push "route 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0"and finaly moving new VPN to 10.8.2.0/24, I can access my local machines from the phone over VPN.
But again thanks for quick response. Hope this helps someone in the future.
