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

pfSense 2.5.1 not recognizing my default ipv4 route

Routing and Multi WAN
8
23
2.8k
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.
  • J
    jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
    last edited by Apr 14, 2021, 1:34 PM

    I wonder if it might be related to the changes on https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/11713

    The % is a tell-tale sign it's trying to consider that an IPv6 link-local route, when it's an IPv4 link-local address.

    You could try this change to see if it helps:

    diff --git a/src/etc/inc/util.inc b/src/etc/inc/util.inc
    index c330e3a22d..c3973b1b47 100644
    --- a/src/etc/inc/util.inc
    +++ b/src/etc/inc/util.inc
    @@ -2848,7 +2848,7 @@ function route_add_or_change($target, $gw, $iface = '', $args = '',
            if (is_ipaddr($gw)) {
                    /* set correct linklocal gateway address,
                     * see https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/11713 */
    -               if (is_linklocal($gw) && empty(get_ll_scope($gw))) {
    +               if (is_ipaddrv6($gw) && is_linklocal($gw) && empty(get_ll_scope($gw))) {
                            $routeget = route_get($gw, 'inet6', true);
                            $gw .= "%" . $routeget[0]['interface-name'];
                    }
    
    

    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 I L 4 Replies Last reply Apr 14, 2021, 1:48 PM Reply Quote 1
    • S
      slu @jimp
      last edited by Apr 14, 2021, 1:48 PM

      If i understand this right, it's not a good idea to update a remote PPPoE_WAN pfSense from 2.5.0 to 2.5.1 right now?

      pfSense Gold subscription

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • J
        jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
        last edited by Apr 14, 2021, 2:20 PM

        Has nothing to do with PPPoE or anything like that.

        It's because they are using 169.254.x.x as their interface gateway -- that's IPv4 link-local, a special network.

        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!

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
        • I
          intellq @jimp
          last edited by Apr 14, 2021, 2:51 PM

          @jimp thanks for your reply.

          If I'm understanding correctly, I would have to recompile the code to test the change you suggest?

          I'm far from being a FreeBSD expert, and have no idea how to do that. Can you point me in the right direction? :)

          J 1 Reply Last reply Apr 14, 2021, 3:03 PM Reply Quote 0
          • J
            johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @intellq
            last edited by Apr 14, 2021, 3:03 PM

            No need to compile any code.. Its just the change he listed in the util.inc file

            You should be able to apply the patch via the patch package..

            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 2.7.2, 24.11

            I 1 Reply Last reply Apr 14, 2021, 3:07 PM Reply Quote 2
            • I
              intellq @johnpoz
              last edited by Apr 14, 2021, 3:07 PM

              @johnpoz said in pfSense 2.5.1 not recognizing my default ipv4 route:

              No need to compile any code.. Its just the change he listed in the util.inc file

              You should be able to apply the patch via the patch package..

              Oops :P

              I'll try it when I get home.

              Thanks guys!

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • I
                intellq @jimp
                last edited by intellq Apr 14, 2021, 4:51 PM Apr 14, 2021, 4:50 PM

                @jimp said in pfSense 2.5.1 not recognizing my default ipv4 route:

                I wonder if it might be related to the changes on https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/11713

                The % is a tell-tale sign it's trying to consider that an IPv6 link-local route, when it's an IPv4 link-local address.

                You could try this change to see if it helps:

                I did the change. New error:

                login-to-view

                But believe it or not, it's working. The default route is now (again) being deployed.

                Leave it that way or any other advice?

                G 1 Reply Last reply Apr 15, 2021, 7:48 AM Reply Quote 0
                • J
                  jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                  last edited by Apr 14, 2021, 5:01 PM

                  Thanks for testing that patch. Those errors should be harmless if it's working otherwise.

                  I opened https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/11806 so we can look into this deeper now that we have all the info together.

                  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!

                  I 1 Reply Last reply Apr 15, 2021, 10:51 AM Reply Quote 1
                  • G
                    Gertjan @intellq
                    last edited by Apr 15, 2021, 7:48 AM

                    @intellq said in pfSense 2.5.1 not recognizing my default ipv4 route:

                    New error:

                    More like "the next error".
                    Because WAN is up and running, OpenVPN can actually start and find an environment where it can do something useful.
                    One of the conditions is of course a working WAN.

                    "The route has not been found" message itself is pretty harmless.

                    No "help me" PM's please. Use the forum, the community will thank you.
                    Edit : and where are the logs ??

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • I
                      intellq @jimp
                      last edited by intellq Apr 15, 2021, 10:52 AM Apr 15, 2021, 10:51 AM

                      @jimp thanks for all the help. And the description you wrote when creating the issue was pretty accurate.

                      @Gertjan thankfully a solution was found. All I can ask for :)

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • L
                        Lanna @jimp
                        last edited by Lanna Apr 20, 2021, 10:34 AM Apr 20, 2021, 10:14 AM

                        @jimp

                        Hello, I recently upgraded a couple of boxes and this appears to have broken some site-to-site VPN connections. I gave the above edit a try but it didn't fix anything for me. I note the following fix described in the 2.5.1 release blog post. . .

                        • Interface and routing issues which in certain cases could lead to problems with responding to requests from non-default WANs, problems determining gateways, configuring routes, and route lookups

                        Could you please further describe these changes and how I might roll them back somehow to get these site to site issues nailed down because it's causing me quite a headache. The problem in my case is that NATted connections into one pfSense box, routed through the tunnel to the other pfSense box, fail to get a reply now. I've not found a way to fix this. I considered going back to 2.5.0 but what would be involved in that is even more onerous than the situation I'm facing now with these lost packets. To be more specific, any incoming OpenVPN client connection NATted via the remote pfSsense box fails, with state of:

                        NO_TRAFFIC:SINGLE

                        and VPN log of :
                        TLS Error: incoming packet authentication failed from [AF_INET]

                        If the client tries to connect to the local pfSense box directly, the connection succeeds. However, this is not sustainable due to local box not having static IP.

                        It is noteworthy that we have 3 WANS and multiple OpenVPN instances. All OpenVPN servers are running on localhost so we can utilise all WANs for incoming connections.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • L
                          Lanna
                          last edited by Apr 20, 2021, 1:31 PM

                          This post is deleted!
                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • L
                            Lanna
                            last edited by Apr 20, 2021, 2:01 PM

                            Actually my network is just unravelling completely, I need to roll back to 2.5.0 but I can't find anywhere to download it on the site. I read that Netgate have intentionally stopped making older versions available. This is proving disastrous for me and I can't find the version on my HDD anywhere. I urge you to reconsider this move, I desperately need to install 2.5.0 and get back to where I was.

                            EDIT: It looks like my issues is related directly to Regression #11805. I humbly and without shame beg for a manual instruction on a fix.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • L
                              Lanna
                              last edited by Apr 20, 2021, 2:39 PM

                              For anyone else in despair like me, here is what'll save you. 2.5.0 is still on the official mirror here. . .
                              https://sgpfiles.netgate.com/mirror/downloads/

                              Get it fast before they pull the rug.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • S
                                sananibrahimoff
                                last edited by Apr 21, 2021, 8:19 AM

                                This post is deleted!
                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • B
                                  brianj2k @Gertjan
                                  last edited by May 13, 2021, 5:12 PM

                                  @gertjan I know this is a delayed response, but do you believe end-users can move their ISPs to make systemic changes because 1 out of a million end-user router vendors has an issue...

                                  I get that this is bad/wrong and that the provider SHOULD make a change, but making pfSense unusable to "solve" the problem is actually more of a pfSense issue. Might want to add a checkbox that enables this to work instead of breaking systems when they upgrade.

                                  G 1 Reply Last reply May 13, 2021, 10:08 PM Reply Quote 0
                                  • G
                                    Gertjan @brianj2k
                                    last edited by May 13, 2021, 10:08 PM

                                    @brianj2k said in pfSense 2.5.1 not recognizing my default ipv4 route:

                                    @gertjan I know this is a delayed response

                                    To what question ?

                                    @brianj2k said in pfSense 2.5.1 not recognizing my default ipv4 route:

                                    but making pfSense unusable to "solve" the problem is actually more of a pfSense issue.

                                    A developer should have that ISP connection at hand so the situation can get analyzed.

                                    No "help me" PM's please. Use the forum, the community will thank you.
                                    Edit : and where are the logs ??

                                    B 1 Reply Last reply May 14, 2021, 4:03 AM Reply Quote 0
                                    • B
                                      brianj2k @Gertjan
                                      last edited by May 14, 2021, 4:03 AM

                                      @gertjan said in pfSense 2.5.1 not recognizing my default ipv4 route:

                                      @brianj2k said in pfSense 2.5.1 not recognizing my default ipv4 route:

                                      @gertjan I know this is a delayed response
                                      

                                      To what question ?

                                      To your response to the original poster... I thought that was obvious...

                                      @brianj2k said in pfSense 2.5.1 not recognizing my default ipv4 route:

                                      but making pfSense unusable to "solve" the problem is actually more of a pfSense issue.

                                      A developer should have that ISP connection at hand so the situation can get analyzed.

                                      I find this to be an odd response. I do lots of development without the assistance, or knowledge, of my ISP. I think you may be a bit naive to think that every developer has access at that level to their ISP.

                                      G 1 Reply Last reply May 14, 2021, 5:33 AM Reply Quote 0
                                      • G
                                        Gertjan @brianj2k
                                        last edited by May 14, 2021, 5:33 AM

                                        @brianj2k said in pfSense 2.5.1 not recognizing my default ipv4 route:

                                        I think you may be a bit naive to think that every developer has access at that level to their ISP.

                                        I didn't say that. It's the other way around ;)
                                        A pfSense developer would 'code around' the situation when it happens to his connection => issue solved - no need to contact the ISP.

                                        Still, in this special case , I maintain my position : if an ISP really assigns a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link-local_address I would contact its client service just ones : to say 'good bye', as it's plain broken.
                                        And that's a language every ISP will understand.

                                        No "help me" PM's please. Use the forum, the community will thank you.
                                        Edit : and where are the logs ??

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • J
                                          jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                                          last edited by jimp May 14, 2021, 12:48 PM May 14, 2021, 12:48 PM

                                          You are aware the issue linked upthread has a committed fix already which addresses the problem? We didn't have any problem solving it, there just hasn't been a release including the fix yet.

                                          https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/11806

                                          You can apply the commit there with the system patches package if you need to use IPv4 link local gateways.

                                          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!

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