No routing to class C WAN
-
@zak-mckracken said in No routing to class C WAN:
My LAN uses a class B IP range: 172.17.0.0/16. Could it be that class B ranges are not routed to class C?
No, that has nothing to do with it. I use 172.16.0.0 for my local subnet and it works find. And please forget about class b, c, etc.. As I mentioned, those terms have been obsolete for decades. Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) has been around since 1993, where you specify a network address and size, such as 172.16.0.0/24 for mine.
-
@zak-mckracken said in No routing to class C WAN:
But when it's connector the the FTTH router, I get this:
What happens if you connect a computer directly to the FTTH router? If it still doesn't work then there's a problem on the ISP side that has nothing to do with pfsense.
-
@johnpoz said in No routing to class C WAN:
@zak-mckracken said in No routing to class C WAN:
So while on the pfsense web gui - go to the ping under diagnostic - can pfsense ping 8.8.8.8?No, it cannot; No response.
can you do dns?
No, host could not be resolved.
But it does route from my LAN to the FTTH router intermediate network. From my laptop on my LAN, I can ping the WAN IP address, 192.168.1.1. I can even ping the FTTH router itself on 192.168.1.254, from my laptop on my LAN, through the pfSense router.
It seems like my pfSense router doesn't know any default gateways, as it itself concludes that 8.8.8.8 it unreachable, instead of forwarding it to 192.168.1.254. I can't remember I ever had to configure such a thing.
-
@jknott said in No routing to class C WAN:
What happens if you connect a computer directly to the FTTH router? If it still doesn't work then there's a problem on the ISP side that has nothing to do with pfsense.
That works just fine. I'm not getting the speed advertised, but that's rather standard since the dawn of ISPs.
-
I'm sorry if I cannot respond the next two days, as my wife has declared this an internet-free house for Christmas. I witheld my urge to argue, asking her if she realises how much stuff in our house will nog longer, just barely. She probably just means screen-staring.
Merry Christmas!
-
@zak-mckracken said in No routing to class C WAN:
I'm not getting the speed advertised, but that's rather standard since the dawn of ISPs.
Yep, Here's what I just got on my 500/30 connection:
-
@zak-mckracken said in No routing to class C WAN:
I'm not getting the speed advertised, but that's rather standard since the dawn of ISPs.
Would depend on how much your off, if your suppose to get 500 and your getting 300, I would look into that - if your getting 480 then maybe not, etc..
I had and issue for a bit where I was not seeing the 50 up that suppose to get - was only getting like 30 top.. Took them 3 days and 2 truck rolls but they got it fixed.. And now see 50.. sometimes a bit over.. and have never had any issues getting my 500 down.
Seeing touch under my 50 currently - but also streaming off my plex to one of my users at over 5mbps..
-
Ok, spent Christmas with the family, now back to debugging.
As said, everything seems to work: I can ping nodes on the intermediate network on the WAN side. I can even visit the fiberglass router's webpages from the LAN side.Routing from WAN to LAN works just fine. The only thing that doesn't work, is forwarding traffic for neither network to a default gateway. And I think I've found something.When connected to the cable modem (in bridge mode), my gateways look like this:
But when connected to the fiberglass router (not capable of bridge mode), they look like this:
The WANGW setting seems to be fixed, hard-coded. And it is configured as the IPv4 default gateway.I can easily fix it, but I do not like hard-coded settings that are normally received over DHCP. Because if my ISP changes something, my internet connections stops working, and the searching game is on.
Does anybody know what the WANGW setting is for? I do have ntopng installed.
-
@zak-mckracken you created a gateway by hand - remove it you should only have the wan_dhcp gateway.
Click the little trash can next to the wangw
-
@johnpoz said in No routing to class C WAN:
@zak-mckracken you created a gateway by hand - remove it you should only have the wan_dhcp gateway.
Click the little trash can next to the wangw
I leaned towards that conclusion too, but this is really not something I would do, because I'm just not knowledgeable enough to be comfortable with settings like that.
So at first I thought it was the result of some other setting, or some package that I had installed. But that doesn't make sense.
So I went through my posting history here on the forum, because I've probably consulted people here about this setting, and I've found this post:
https://forum.netgate.com/post/993975
Apparently, I had overridden my WAN IP address, netmask and default gateway to work around a provider-problem. Later, I reverted back the WAN IP address and netmask, but most likely neglected to revert the default gateway override.Does that make sense, or could it still be a package or another setting that's responsible for WANGW?
-
@zak-mckracken clearly your not going to be using isp A ip address with isp B clearly the wants was added by hand you have dhcp delete it
-
@johnpoz said in No routing to class C WAN:
@zak-mckracken clearly your not going to be using isp A ip address with isp B clearly the wants was added by hand you have dhcp delete it
Well, I was considering to change it to the new intermediate network gateway, but that doesn't make sense: The added gateway is identical to the DHCP gateway, kind'a confirming it was added manually due to the problem I described in the other thread.
So you're right; It has to go!
And so it went, nothing seems to break down with it.
Thanks for all the help, guys!
