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

Deleting interface does not delete firewall rules

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved 2.5 Development Snapshots (Retired)
12 Posts 2 Posters 2.0k 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.
  • S
    strangegopher
    last edited by strangegopher Apr 3, 2019, 9:06 PM Apr 3, 2019, 6:12 AM

    I deleted vlan interface and the firewall rules associated with the interface did not get deleted. I know this because I couldn't delete port and ip alias only used on a rule on deleted interface. Also I saw the rules still show up in config.xml. I manually deleted those rules from config.xml and rebooted and it seems to now let me delete the aliases. Note: I did try reboot before editing config.xml to see if it would allow me to delete aliases but no luck.

    Another error in logs that popped up was: pfr_update_stats: assertion failed. spam like twice an hour. Not sure if related. Google says its issue with pfb-devel but I removed that package before deleting the interface and had no issues before deleting the interface. I reinstalled the package and setup bare minimum blocking (easylist) for dnsbl and no ip blocking and turned on suppression but the error still shows up. Not sure what the issue is, I have downloaded and restored config to see if that fixes the issue. Will report back. Edit: didn't fix it. I'll check the config.xml again to see if I missed any rules.

    Edit2: I just remembered, the rules were on a interface group (sorry I deleted both vlan and interface group and forgot)

    edit3: just did a full reinstall, hoping this will fix the error

    another edit: reinstalled with no pfblockerng and still seeing pfr_update_stats: assertion failed. code is not very clear either: https://github.com/pfsense/FreeBSD-src/blob/a595f803281ea3b25079c9d04a3f5b9a3f0b8a52/sys/netpfil/pf/pf_table.c#L1988

    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
    • S
      strangegopher
      last edited by strangegopher Apr 3, 2019, 10:06 PM Apr 3, 2019, 9:33 PM

      viewing rules in console doesn't show any invalid rules. Ref: https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/firewall/viewing-the-full-pf-ruleset.html

      edit: it could be another bug https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234874

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • S
        strangegopher
        last edited by strangegopher Apr 3, 2019, 10:10 PM Apr 3, 2019, 10:08 PM

        this seems like the fix (mute the message): https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/stable/12/sys/netpfil/pf/pf_table.c?r1=343289&r2=343288&pathrev=343289

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • S
          strangegopher
          last edited by Apr 5, 2019, 7:51 PM

          a1c96692-b5ae-4d45-9f73-719d86aacc86-image.png

          bump

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • J
            jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
            last edited by Apr 5, 2019, 8:05 PM

            That error has nothing to do with deleting an interface or rules. Probably just a coincidence.

            We could add that patch, though, open a request on https://redmine.pfsense.org/ and reference that error message, FreeBSD bug report, and the diff. Do not mention deleting the interface/rules though because that isn't related.

            As for deleted interface rules, that's how it's always worked. I think there is already an open issue to change things there.

            Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

            Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

            Do not Chat/PM for help!

            S 1 Reply Last reply Apr 5, 2019, 8:20 PM Reply Quote 0
            • S
              strangegopher @jimp
              last edited by Apr 5, 2019, 8:20 PM

              @jimp done https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/9459

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • S
                strangegopher
                last edited by Apr 17, 2019, 11:02 AM

                completely rebuilt pfsense in virtualbox, then deployed it on baremetal box. I don't see the issue anymore. Will update if it continues.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S
                  strangegopher
                  last edited by strangegopher Apr 17, 2019, 12:19 PM Apr 17, 2019, 11:26 AM

                  nevermind the issue is back. idk i tried everything to fix it.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • S
                    strangegopher
                    last edited by strangegopher Apr 17, 2019, 6:05 PM Apr 17, 2019, 6:04 PM

                    alright so played around with more settings.
                    disabled nat reflection and port forward to plex manjaro box. No warnings in last hour. I still have another port forward to deluge with no issues. clearly some odd nat reflection issue.

                    b652f6bd-0aec-4f4d-a67a-13c511896d1b-image.png

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • S
                      strangegopher
                      last edited by Apr 17, 2019, 6:50 PM

                      no warnings for 2 hrs. nat reflection is clearly the reason for this warning. possible bug.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • S
                        strangegopher
                        last edited by Apr 19, 2019, 12:15 AM

                        no warning for past day.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • S
                          strangegopher
                          last edited by May 13, 2019, 7:15 PM

                          So I was able to find another way to keep nat reflection turned on and stop the spam. I changed one of the port forward rules from tcp/udp to separate tcp and udp rules. It fixed the issue. tcp/udp port forward rule might be broken.

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