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

    Strange issue - not sure how to fix

    General pfSense Questions
    3
    93
    9.4k
    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.
    • johnpozJ
      johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
      last edited by

      No problem - glad finally figured out the issue.

      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 24.03 | Lab VMs 2.7.2, 24.03

      P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • P
        pfguy2018 @johnpoz
        last edited by

        @johnpoz said in Strange issue - not sure how to fix:

        No problem - glad finally figured out the issue.

        ... hopefully! I am keeping my fingers crossed.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • P
          pfguy2018
          last edited by

          Looks like I spoke too soon. Problem recurred. And the output of the dig feedly.com + trace command is showing that the root servers are not being reached.

          
; <<>> DiG 9.12.2-P1 <<>> feedly.com +trace
;; global options: +cmd
.			86400	IN	NS	b.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	NS	a.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	NS	e.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	NS	m.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	NS	l.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	NS	j.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	NS	g.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	NS	c.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	NS	h.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	NS	d.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	NS	k.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	NS	f.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	NS	i.root-servers.net.
.			86400	IN	RRSIG	NS 8 0 518400 20200307170000 20200223160000 33853 . GN9hZh6mOFruU2IWiP4EIvALgU6uQLlXo748wScmwsJYCcmPiPFT6y2q NnsJfg06OrI2qhZueL0NNtcZ5W9hGLFff3nzUcOETUnEWcbW4MwIRWDx VQ4MVMmsnIhWM3BCQdA5hG0eIALwJ+9q3aUe+lHhORN98lpYxfs+tx73 A+GgmNZUm4Coz44hmhJ6G+mM0mYsMLZ1oAvDH/exgo/VExwEA9P3xyRQ b5H09yJdc0cdmygbD8R1L/yjyQUlnyKLOC8ZQ3bpei9NKRXWqv5p29cn pwt4AiaAuZNkCVQA9SIWIKdFVrBh40NsO+RDpEcmh84r30wTVm+qYGT4 PItLag==
;; Received 525 bytes from 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) in 4256 ms

;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached

          But I am able to connect to Feedly because there is a cached entry in Unbound - at least until the cache expires. Back to being mystified.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • P
            pfguy2018
            last edited by

            Any chance this NAT rule could be causing the problem?

            Source any/any
            Destination (non-local DNS resolver)/port 53
            Redirect to 127.0.0.1:53

            Would this be blocking access to the root servers?

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

              No your just redirecting say dns to 8.8.8.8 from a client to pfsense..

              What unbound restarting when you tested that? Did you sniff while you did that, did you see anything go out? Did you see answers? Look to see how long unbound was running after that..

              You sure your not just restarting unbound all the time.. Do you have it registering dhcp?

              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 24.03 | Lab VMs 2.7.2, 24.03

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • P
                pfguy2018
                last edited by

                Then I am stumped. I really don't understand what is blocking access to the root servers.

                No unbound was not restarting when I posted the last snippet last night.
                Here is the output for unbound now:

                version: 1.9.1
verbosity: 1
threads: 4
modules: 2 [ validator iterator ]
uptime: 33792 seconds
options: control(ssl)
unbound (pid 79706) is running...

                (I rebooted my pfsense last night after my previous post - it has been running since then.)

                Yes, Unbound is registering DHCP. Could that be the issue here? I have always had it set up like that (for many years) with none of these problems.

                My suspicion is that the answer here lies somewhere with pfBlockerNG and its updates and the effect on DNS resolver. But I am not sure exactly where, or how to troubleshoot or resolve it beyond disabling pfBlocker. For now, I have reduced the frequency of pfBlocker NG updates/cron jobs to once daily, which will make it easier for me to figure out if the failure of DNS resolution coincides with that process.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • stephenw10S
                  stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                  last edited by

                  Removing dhcp leases from Unbound will prevent it restarting anywhere near as often. If that stops this issue happening it will be a clue at least.
                  You can hit a critical point when the size of the lists pfBlocker is putting into Unbound makes it slow to start and the number of clients creating dhcp leases ends up running together and bad things happen. Though usually that a lot. Of both.

                  Steve

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • P
                    pfguy2018
                    last edited by pfguy2018

                    @stephenw10 said in Strange issue - not sure how to fix:

                    Removing dhcp leases from Unbound will prevent it restarting anywhere near as often. If that stops this issue happening it will be a clue at least.
                    You can hit a critical point when the size of the lists pfBlocker is putting into Unbound makes it slow to start and the number of clients creating dhcp leases ends up running together and bad things happen. Though usually that a lot. Of both.

                    Steve

                    I have not observed frequent Unbound restarts, so I am not sure whether that is part of the issue. (I do have DHCP leases in Unbound, but these leases have been there for years and have not previously caused any issues for me).

                    As I noted earlier, I reduced the frequency of pfBlockerNG updates to once daily. The first such update occurred at midnight last night, and this AM, I was in fact able to access feedly.com (good). However, when I checked the log for pfBlockerNG, every single feed had the following message:

                    Downloading update [ 02/25/20 00:26:26 ] . cURL Error: 7
 Retry in 5 seconds...
. cURL Error: 7
 Retry in 5 seconds...
. cURL Error: 7
 Retry in 5 seconds...
.. unknown http status code | 0

                    i.e. no feeds could be updated. I know for a fact that after I reboot pfSense, the pfBlockerNG list updates work, because I have previously checked the log at that time to ensure that the lists updated. Is this evidence that pfSense can't reach the root servers to resolve DNS? And if so, does this get me any closer to identifying the issue in my case? I should point out that I don't have a ton of lists active in pfBlocker, and my pfSense has plenty of RAM available.

                    output of dig feedly.com +trace command right now:

                    ; <<>> DiG 9.12.2-P1 <<>> feedly.com +trace
;; global options: +cmd
.			86361	IN	NS	d.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	NS	c.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	NS	i.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	NS	l.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	NS	b.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	NS	g.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	NS	e.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	NS	m.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	NS	f.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	NS	h.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	NS	a.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	NS	k.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	NS	j.root-servers.net.
.			86361	IN	RRSIG	NS 8 0 518400 20200309050000 20200225040000 33853 . H9pXeT3s7yemEb6BFdL+eF38hP6nN2fY+S5UD+yM/06AdAlAVOo2wEBW oPAeplPIb1Zb7qNunqUQIHn+FDZqt79A43Poa3OevXxsQERuBcat6IkX v4H6/b3pGsA40KH1GfcbAnz8QlBhHrGIoFlgrQnvltIt7k9pCqA+D3iq YjMz/3dTlePWDQggN3Rao/nn6ZLO+4LF+FM52XTkCgXFPU5Ska6qzm5G 2gDOI7dpyk5DhHj2uc6IrsZWjwgG897Ba1G1fKZxUt8A208O58m4tbs1 ccrHmkfeVdQOwWOBOPCsnYQLtY8BVGL35U6VkGRdqU4U6jeGEFD0A2Pe QfIDkg==
;; Received 525 bytes from 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) in 0 ms

;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached

                    (feedly.com is reachable from my network - DNS resolver must be serving up a cached address).

                    Unbound has been up for a while (33+ hours, i.e. since my last reboot):

                    version: 1.9.1
verbosity: 1
threads: 4
modules: 2 [ validator iterator ]
uptime: 119718 seconds
options: control(ssl)
unbound (pid 79706) is running...

                    Other data:

                    The following name servers are used for lookup of .
;rrset 85994 13 1 11 5
.	85994	IN	NS	d.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	NS	c.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	NS	i.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	NS	l.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	NS	b.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	NS	g.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	NS	e.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	NS	m.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	NS	f.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	NS	h.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	NS	a.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	NS	k.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	NS	j.root-servers.net.
.	85994	IN	RRSIG	NS 8 0 518400 20200309050000 20200225040000 33853 . H9pXeT3s7yemEb6BFdL+eF38hP6nN2fY+S5UD+yM/06AdAlAVOo2wEBWoPAeplPIb1Zb7qNunqUQIHn+FDZqt79A43Poa3OevXxsQERuBcat6IkXv4H6/b3pGsA40KH1GfcbAnz8QlBhHrGIoFlgrQnvltIt7k9pCqA+D3iqYjMz/3dTlePWDQggN3Rao/nn6ZLO+4LF+FM52XTkCgXFPU5Ska6qzm5G2gDOI7dpyk5DhHj2uc6IrsZWjwgG897Ba1G1fKZxUt8A208O58m4tbs1ccrHmkfeVdQOwWOBOPCsnYQLtY8BVGL35U6VkGRdqU4U6jeGEFD0A2PeQfIDkg== ;{id = 33853}
;rrset 86035 1 0 8 3
j.root-servers.net.	86035	IN	A	192.58.128.30
;rrset 86035 1 0 8 3
j.root-servers.net.	86035	IN	AAAA	2001:503:c27::2:30
;rrset 86035 1 0 8 3
k.root-servers.net.	86035	IN	A	193.0.14.129
;rrset 86035 1 0 8 3
k.root-servers.net.	86035	IN	AAAA	2001:7fd::1
;rrset 86035 1 0 8 3
a.root-servers.net.	86035	IN	A	198.41.0.4
;rrset 86035 1 0 8 3
a.root-servers.net.	86035	IN	AAAA	2001:503:ba3e::2:30
;rrset 86035 1 0 8 3
h.root-servers.net.	86035	IN	A	198.97.190.53
;rrset 86035 1 0 8 3
h.root-servers.net.	86035	IN	AAAA	2001:500:1::53
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
f.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	A	192.5.5.241
;rrset 86035 1 0 8 3
f.root-servers.net.	86035	IN	AAAA	2001:500:2f::f
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
m.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	A	202.12.27.33
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
m.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	AAAA	2001:dc3::35
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
e.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	A	192.203.230.10
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
e.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	AAAA	2001:500:a8::e
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
g.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	A	192.112.36.4
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
g.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	AAAA	2001:500:12::d0d
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
b.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	A	199.9.14.201
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
b.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	AAAA	2001:500:200::b
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
l.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	A	199.7.83.42
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
l.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	AAAA	2001:500:9f::42
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
i.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	A	192.36.148.17
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
i.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	AAAA	2001:7fe::53
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
c.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	A	192.33.4.12
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
c.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	AAAA	2001:500:2::c
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
d.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	A	199.7.91.13
;rrset 86034 1 0 8 3
d.root-servers.net.	86034	IN	AAAA	2001:500:2d::d
Delegation with 13 names, of which 0 can be examined to query further addresses.
It provides 26 IP addresses.
2001:500:2d::d  	not in infra cache.
199.7.91.13     	rto 315 msec, ttl 494, ping 3 var 78 rtt 315, tA 0, tAAAA 0, tother 0, EDNS 0 probed.
2001:500:2::c   	not in infra cache.
192.33.4.12     	rto 199 msec, ttl 494, ping 11 var 47 rtt 199, tA 0, tAAAA 0, tother 0, EDNS 0 probed.
2001:7fe::53    	not in infra cache.
192.36.148.17   	rto 344 msec, ttl 494, ping 44 var 75 rtt 344, tA 0, tAAAA 0, tother 0, EDNS 0 probed.
2001:500:9f::42 	not in infra cache.
199.7.83.42     	rto 195 msec, ttl 494, ping 11 var 46 rtt 195, tA 0, tAAAA 0, tother 0, EDNS 0 probed.
2001:500:200::b 	not in infra cache.
199.9.14.201    	rto 308 msec, ttl 112, ping 36 var 68 rtt 308, tA 0, tAAAA 0, tother 0, EDNS 0 probed.
2001:500:12::d0d	not in infra cache.
192.112.36.4    	not in infra cache.
2001:500:a8::e  	not in infra cache.
192.203.230.10  	rto 195 msec, ttl 494, ping 3 var 48 rtt 195, tA 0, tAAAA 0, tother 0, EDNS 0 probed.
2001:dc3::35    	not in infra cache.
202.12.27.33    	rto 360 msec, ttl 494, ping 8 var 88 rtt 360, tA 0, tAAAA 0, tother 0, EDNS 0 probed.
2001:500:2f::f  	not in infra cache.
192.5.5.241     	rto 229 msec, ttl 494, ping 1 var 57 rtt 229, tA 0, tAAAA 0, tother 0, EDNS 0 probed.
2001:500:1::53  	not in infra cache.
198.97.190.53   	rto 204 msec, ttl 494, ping 12 var 48 rtt 204, tA 0, tAAAA 0, tother 0, EDNS 0 probed.
2001:503:ba3e::2:30	not in infra cache.
198.41.0.4      	rto 145 msec, ttl 494, ping 13 var 33 rtt 145, tA 0, tAAAA 0, tother 0, EDNS 0 probed.
2001:7fd::1     	not in infra cache.
193.0.14.129    	not in infra cache.
2001:503:c27::2:30	not in infra cache.
192.58.128.30   	rto 163 msec, ttl 494, ping 15 var 37 rtt 163, tA 0, tAAAA 0, tother 0, EDNS 0 probed.
                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • P
                      pfguy2018
                      last edited by pfguy2018

                      What I posted above would seem to confirm that the root servers are reachable by my system. So I am not sure why the dig feedly.com +trace command yields the output I posted above. But feedly is still reachable via cached DNS:

                      ; <<>> DiG 9.12.2-P1 <<>> feedly.com
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 18657
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;feedly.com.			IN	A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
feedly.com.		0	IN	A	104.20.59.241
feedly.com.		0	IN	A	104.20.60.241

;; Query time: 0 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
;; WHEN: Tue Feb 25 07:24:23 EST 2020
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 71
                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • P
                        pfguy2018
                        last edited by

                        @johnpoz said in Strange issue - not sure how to fix:

                        dig @h.root-servers.net com NS

                        This was just now.

                        dig: couldn't get address for 'h.root-servers.net': not found

                        ; <<>> DiG 9.12.2-P1 <<>> @198.97.190.53 com ns
; (1 server found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached

                        I am really stumped by all this.

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

                          Because unbound not running.. Why don't you turn off pfblocker for a bit and see if you continue to have issues.

                          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 24.03 | Lab VMs 2.7.2, 24.03

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • P
                            pfguy2018
                            last edited by

                            @johnpoz said in Strange issue - not sure how to fix:

                            Because unbound not running.. Why don't you turn off pfblocker for a bit and see if you continue to have issues.

                            My previous post showed that unbound IS running. That's what makes this so perplexing.

                            I am at work now, but when I return home, I am going to give your suggestion of disabling pfBlocker a shot to see what I can discover.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • P
                              pfguy2018
                              last edited by

                              Popping back in here. I think the issue might be solved. After searching these forums, I came across a post in this thread (https://forum.netgate.com/topic/147092/curl-error-7-on-all-downloads/8) that noted curl errors in pfBlockerNG after the default WAN gateway had been changed. I have been observing the same errors when pfBlockerNG updates, and lo and behold, my default gateway had also changed from what I had originally set. I changed it back to what it should be, and instantly DNS began to resolve. However, I am not sure how/why this unintended gateway change occurred, or how to prevent it from happening again.

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

                                @pfguy2018 said in Strange issue - not sure how to fix:

                                my default gateway had also changed from what I had originally set.

                                Meaning what exactly.. You have more than 1 wan interface? Your using PPPoE? Your using a VPN? What do you mean your gateway changed?

                                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 24.03 | Lab VMs 2.7.2, 24.03

                                P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • P
                                  pfguy2018 @johnpoz
                                  last edited by

                                  @johnpoz said in Strange issue - not sure how to fix:

                                  @pfguy2018 said in Strange issue - not sure how to fix:

                                  my default gateway had also changed from what I had originally set.

                                  Meaning what exactly.. You have more than 1 wan interface? Your using PPPoE? Your using a VPN? What do you mean your gateway changed?

                                  Yes - I have several outgoing interfaces set up due to VPN use. The default has always been the WAN (non VPN) interface (for many years). At some point this got changed (without any intervention on my part), and re-setting it seems to have fixed the DNS issue. I will continue to monitor to see if this remains fixed. But I have no idea how/why the change happened in the first place, and whether it might occur again.

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

                                    Well if you pull routes from your vpn service, its possible that becomes the default..

                                    If your going to use a vpn service - its best to not pull routes from them, even though pretty much all their guides say to, or don't mention it (and its default)..

                                    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 24.03 | Lab VMs 2.7.2, 24.03

                                    P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • P
                                      pfguy2018 @johnpoz
                                      last edited by pfguy2018

                                      @johnpoz

                                      Where would I adjust that setting for VPN?

                                      Also - interestingly - the default interface became one of the incoming VPN servers that are run on my pfSense box (I have several). Not sure if that is relevant or not.

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

                                        In your vpn client setting, check the box that says do not pull routes..

                                        routes.jpg

                                        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 24.03 | Lab VMs 2.7.2, 24.03

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • P
                                          pfguy2018
                                          last edited by pfguy2018

                                          Thanks. Is there an equivalent setting for the VPN servers that I run on the pfSense box? I don't actually have any VPN clients set up on pfSense

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

                                            What do you want your clients to do, do you want them to just come to pfsense for your network(s).. Then don't set it to be the default route..

                                            clients.jpg

                                            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 24.03 | Lab VMs 2.7.2, 24.03

                                            P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post