Simple VLAN setup

johntucker

Thanks,

The only reason I used VLAN 1 for the switch is Netgear recommends exactly that.

johnpoz

never ever use VLAN 1 !

If he was in a corp setup, or a dod or something ok sure.. But in a home setup this is nothing wrong with using the default vlan..

But something is not right here, your lan is untagged I take it - so this would be vlan 1 on your switch.. Are you then trying to tag admin as vlan 1? That would be a nono..

Use a different ID for tagging your admin network.

kiokoman

of course it is wrong even at home, i was referring to the admin vlan1, the switch doesn't know if you are at home or in a corp. the native vlan of the switch is 1 ... if you don't change it

johnpoz

Oh yeah that is wrong... I thought you meant to not use it at all ;) For example I have default vlan set to 9 on my switches vs vlan 1 ;) But that is just so many years of not using the default vlan 1.

But in a home setup there is nothing wrong with using vlan 1 on your switch as the default vlan.. But no you can not also then tag some other vlan as 1 ;)

Depending on the level of "smart" they are using - it might not even support changing the default vlan.

johntucker

Greetings,

Things are mostly working now, I guess that the sleep helped the firewall/router as much as I.

The issue now is that the server on the PRIVATE net can't ping its gateway. It can successfully ping the LAN gateway and other devices on the PRIVATE net but not 192.168.10.1.

This is nuts.

johnpoz

And what rules did you put on that interface?

johntucker

Here are screen snaps of all of the rules:

johnpoz

yeah those are ALL wrong ;) When would source lan net ever be inbound source to your wan?

I think you have a basic misunderstanding of how rules are evaluated.
https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/firewall/firewall-rule-processing-order.html

Where in your rules do you allow private net to ping say private address (pfsense IP on private net)

I would suggest you read how rules are evaluated, and if you have any questions ask... But you would never have wan net as source of traffic inbound to private net..

Rules are evaluated as traffic enters the interface from the network its attached too.. First rule to trigger wins, no other rules are evaluated. So its just plain impossible that wan net source would ever be inbound into private interface.

Also just so clear - wan net is NOT internet, wan net is just that - the network attached to wan.

edit: here an example of a setup for say a vlan that is restricted to only internet

First rule allow test network to ping pfsense IP in test network.
2nd rule allows test net to use pfsense IP for dns
3rd rule allows test net to use pfsense for NTP
4th rule blocks all access to any IP of pfsense.. Wan, test, lan, etc..
5th rule blocks all access to any other vlans/networks that are local... The alias contains the rfc1918 space (10/8,192.168/16,172.16/12)
6th rule allow clients on test net to go anywhere else (internet)

johntucker

Thank you, Thank you!

Your example has informed me greatly. I now understand and that is a very good thing.

This is my first direct experience with firewalls (other than the frustration they cause at work) I have been around TCP/IP networks since around 1985 and this is the first time that I have run across problems ping'ing within a subnet. I guess that is due to my avoidance of Microsoft Windows and using only MacOS, Unix & Linux with their rare use of internal/device firewalls. I assumed to much!

Again, I appreciate the time you have taken to provide this example and I have learned a lot from it.

adios,
jt

johnpoz

What we are here for - any other questions just ask..

When you have your rules adjusted - post them and we can discuss.