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

    Multicast

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved NAT
    34 Posts 5 Posters 7.5k 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.
    • DaddyGoD
      DaddyGo @louis2
      last edited by DaddyGo

      @louis2 said in Multicast:
      @louis2 "To answer that first a rough outline of my network"

      nice system, but it's just in your house๐Ÿ˜‰

      Additional, but necessary in a small network,

      this Cisco installment makes up only 2-3% of our system...
      At 18 radiostations, we serve nearly 300 colleagues in the AoIP system with the appropriate audio materials and broadcast the FM-UHF program from 24 telekom towers, within a radius of 350 km
      (the entire system includes 44 voice VLANs, connected by 47 Cisco switches and 8 Brocade switches over fiber and Cat6, this is no small system)
      DANTE protocol (https://www.audinate.com/) ๐Ÿ˜‰

      we never route the multicast traffic, only the core-switches the IGMP querier(s) in the system and control everything

      BTW:
      our own backbone network is 2x40G 2420Km fiber with IEEE 1588 Precision Time Protocol (PTP) across the network

      I've been crying a lot about multicast, since the system latency can't be more than 1-2ms everywhere
      (routers raise this value to the skies)

      +++edit:
      I work with these multicast addresses / ports..

      05fa23ab-0a3e-41d0-bc4e-ad6730feb7d7-image.png

      d459aedf-df13-4d44-b5b7-8f95cf7e1abd-image.png

      Cats bury it so they can't see it!
      (You know what I mean if you have a cat)

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • L
        louis2
        last edited by

        If multicast is in and stays(!) in a dedicated vlan, it is not necessary to send it through a router. And I agree completely, you should not do that because of the added latency.

        However, if the multicast source is in a different vlan as the multicast receiver/destination, than you need to route that. And that will probably be at the users premises and not in the telecom network. ๐Ÿ˜Š

        Note that my provider is sending the TV-streams in a different vlan than the internet, and that the set-top-box is supposed to be connected to that tv-vlan.

        Louis

        DaddyGoD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • DaddyGoD
          DaddyGo @louis2
          last edited by

          @louis2 said in Multicast:

          TV-streams

          in this case you have to route the traffic

          Cats bury it so they can't see it!
          (You know what I mean if you have a cat)

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

            @louis2 said in Multicast:

            Note that my provider is sending the TV-streams in a different vlan than the internet, and that the set-top-box is supposed to be connected to that tv-vlan.

            The way I take that... Is you should split that traffic at layer 2 when it comes in. So your STB would not be behind the layer 3 device..

            Now keep in mind only half way through my first cup of coffee but would you do something like this..

            Where you split the L2 networks before pfsense.

            setup.png

            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 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • L
              louis2
              last edited by

              John,

              I think the same with one small difference, being that the Ls2-switch is inside the ISP-device.

              Not 100% sure, because I have internet and telephone from the ISP and television from the Cable.

              Louis

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • L
                louis2
                last edited by

                To be even more precise, I have the lan-connection(s) from the ISP-device connected to my 1G-coreswitch. At the entrance port of that switch the lan is transformated to a vlan (PID=internet-vlan-no).

                The Internet VLAN is entering pfSense, the TV-vlan (if present), is passing pfSense / stays level2.

                Louis

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

                  @louis2 said in Multicast:

                  is passing pfSense / stays level2.

                  Doesn't work that way, pfsense is a layer 3 device. Pfsense is not going to pass on vlan tags.. Nor layer 2 traffic..

                  Sniffing on pfsense is seeing the vlan traffic.. Then put switch in front of pfsense to send the STB vlan to the devices that are suppose to be on that vlan..

                  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 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                  L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • H
                    hsv
                    last edited by hsv

                    My problem is that it is mail traffic that's coming in and goes to a loadbalancer (MS) this loadbalancer use multicast.
                    So the router need to communicate to this multicast unit.

                    I have tried to look into HAProxy, whit absolut not succes. The documentation I have found do not help me at all.

                    So if som body can point med to a HAproxy description, where you have one front ip number with multiple Ports to 2 or more servers in the backend that could help, as I cannot see pfsense handle this multicast problem.

                    Regards
                    Henning

                    L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • L
                      louis2 @johnpoz
                      last edited by louis2

                      @johnpoz

                      John, I know. The description of my network was over simplified. pfSense is not really in the middle of the 1G and 10G core switches.

                      I have a 1G-network towards most rooms and towards the ISP-device. That network is handled by the 1G-core. And I have a 10G network which connects my server, my nas and my main-PC.

                      Both (physical) networks are connected to pfSense for routing between the VLANs independent from the fact if they are located in the 1G or in the 10G domain.

                      pfSense is connected to the 1G-switch via a 1G-lagg and connected to the 10G-switch via a 10G-up and a 10G-down link. However there is also a direct (physical) connection between those two switches.

                      To take the TV-VLAN as example, is a vlan starting at the ISP-device, passing the 1G-core ending on one of the small Netgear switches in the living room.

                      Louis

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • L
                        louis2 @hsv
                        last edited by

                        @hsv

                        I am not an expert related to loadballancers etc, so wait for the reaction form @johnpoz etc, but to me it sounds strange that the devices like that are based on multicast.

                        I would expect to see some routing protocol there.

                        Louis

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

                          Ok that makes sense.

                          To be honest I have no idea what @hsv is talking about.. Load balancer that uses multicast??

                          For example

                          host with multicast 192.168.0.10 it do not reply.

                          That is NOT a multicast address.. So I have a funny suspicion there is some misuse of terms going on.

                          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 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                          DaddyGoD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • DaddyGoD
                            DaddyGo @johnpoz
                            last edited by DaddyGo

                            @johnpoz said in Multicast:

                            To be honest I have no idea what @hsv is talking about.. Load balancer that uses multicast??

                            from the beginning I have the same feeling John ๐Ÿ˜‰

                            192.168.0.10 RFC1918

                            this has nothing to do with multicast

                            +++edit:

                            for @hsv :
                            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicast_address

                            Cats bury it so they can't see it!
                            (You know what I mean if you have a cat)

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

                              Maybe if he sends some traffic to this device at 192.168.0.10, it multicasts the traffic that is sends on?

                              @hsv really going to need a bit more info.. What is this device, or what software are you running on 192.168.0.10.. What sort of traffic is it?

                              If you can not arp from pfsense, for this 192.168.0.10 address - then no your never going to be able to send it traffic.. To do anything with..

                              From the out side I have 4 NAT rules to direct the trafic to 192.168.0.10

                              Can you post those, so we can maybe glean some insight into what your trying to do exactly.

                              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 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • DaddyGoD
                                DaddyGo
                                last edited by

                                @hsv said in Multicast:

                                loadbalancer (MS)

                                it could be something like that if we go after it better:

                                https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/networking/technologies/network-load-balancing

                                73d9b899-2ed2-4e76-bdca-7c466be69cfb-image.png

                                e6cc0fa2-20dd-4a70-9fc1-4ccc2ff74669-image.png

                                Cats bury it so they can't see it!
                                (You know what I mean if you have a cat)

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • H
                                  hsv
                                  last edited by

                                  Hi
                                  Yes the diagram is correct, but I only have 4 WAN, but I guess the problem will be the same.

                                  And yes pfsense can not resolve it to a MAC adresse.
                                  Why I do not know.

                                  I have no problem on a windows client make arp -a and see the mac address to be:
                                  03-bf-c0-a8-0b-e1

                                  Regards
                                  Henning

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

                                    If pfsense can not arp then you have a connectivity issue..

                                    How do you have this actually connected to pfsense.

                                    If what your trying to do is the above, that has ZERO to do with multicast and pfsense.. What you loadbalancer does with unicast your traffic coming from the internet has nothing to do with pfsense talking to the LB..

                                    You need to figure out what the problem is with basic connectivity from pfsense 192.168.0.1 and this IP at 192.168.0.10 which is your LB.. If pfsense can not even arp for that IP then they are not actually connected via the same L2 network, ie switch cable plugged into pfsense port?

                                    How is 192.168.0.10 connected to this 192.168.0 network?

                                    Now if this 192.168.0.10 is some sort of VIP? If pfsense can not arp for that IP, then it is impossible for it to send it traffic If your saying its just not arping - then setup a static arp entry for it on pfsense.. this 03-bf-c0-a8-0b-e1 mac

                                    But there should be unicast mac for your cluster.. Why can you not use that?

                                    Some details of how you have everything connected will help us help you.

                                    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 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • H
                                      hsv
                                      last edited by

                                      Hi

                                      How do I add a static arp to the arp list?

                                      The setup is 3 virtual host where pfsense and a test windows server is placed on ESXi0 on ESXi1 and 2 the mail setup are running.
                                      From the test server I can ping and resolve the LB but on Pfsense I cannot.

                                      So the network is working. I have for testing setup the Windows Test server with VLAN also so looked from VMware the 2 server are setup the same way.

                                      Regards
                                      Henning

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • DaddyGoD
                                        DaddyGo @hsv
                                        last edited by

                                        @hsv said in Multicast:

                                        es the diagram is correct,

                                        I used to deal with MS load balancer (especially multicast), long time ago...
                                        (we always use a hardware base load balancer, HA proxy )

                                        but I am interested in this topic... ๐Ÿ˜‰

                                        no this will not work under pfSense.... (100%)
                                        bring the theme under linux...

                                        https://github.com/google/seesaw

                                        Cats bury it so they can't see it!
                                        (You know what I mean if you have a cat)

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • H
                                          hsv
                                          last edited by

                                          Hi
                                          I have also come to the same conclusion that multicast and Pfsense is not the way to go, and start to setup HAProxy.

                                          But thanks for you suggestions.

                                          Regards
                                          Henning

                                          DaddyGoD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • DaddyGoD
                                            DaddyGo @hsv
                                            last edited by DaddyGo

                                            @hsv said in Multicast:

                                            Pfsense is not the way to go, and start to setup HAProxy.

                                            it took me a long time to understand what do you mean by original post, I apologize ๐Ÿ˜‰
                                            just the way, it works...HA proxy ๐Ÿ‘ โœ‹

                                            +++edit:
                                            @hsv "but I only have 4 WAN, but I guess the problem will be the same."

                                            this does not matter

                                            Cats bury it so they can't see it!
                                            (You know what I mean if you have a cat)

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.