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

    nat/firewall/ha not working

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved
    General pfSense Questions
    2
    25
    1.1k
    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.
    • stephenw10S
      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
      last edited by

      Ok, so what NAT rules do you have there? If they are over-matching traffic from the firewall itself and NATing to the CARP VIP then only the master node will be able to connect. Even then it can cause problems for some protocols. pkg functions would not normally be one of them but...

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • B
        bryanpedini
        last edited by

        I NAT everything coming from any host port 500 (ISAKMP) to any destination port 500 (ISAKMP) with static port with the public IP (VIP), and then another rule NATting anything everything coming from any host any port to any destination any port with the public IP (VIP).

        the public IP is a VIP of 10.10.0.1 (the CARP VIP), which is currently on firewall 1.
        this is done because I have multiple IP addresses I route from the Cisco router to the firewalls via the CARP VIP, and would need to decide which IP address to use outbound for the specific NATted virtual machines.

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

          Ok, so your second rule there should not be source 'any' because that will include the firewall WAN IP which should not be NAT'd.

          Either add NAT rules for each of your internal subnets as source or create an alias with that subnets in it and use that as the source in a single rule.
          https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/recipes/high-availability.html#configure-outbound-nat-for-carp

          Steve

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • B
            bryanpedini
            last edited by

            okay now I got a strange one at hands...

            this be my alias configuration
            7dc13298-f8b6-493c-b985-00fd2e35b495-image.png

            this be my nat configuration (I verified, it got propagated to all three machines)
            d3c0c3f5-4301-43fd-9871-00d8a7ac4b66-image.png

            when trying to ping 1.1.1.1 from pfsense01 it works, when trying to ping from either pfsense02 or pfsense03 not only it doesn't work, trying to perform a packet capture from the same firewall it doesn't output anything, like if it doesn't even try (and of course it says I don't have network connectivity to register the firewall to pfSense+ or to update packages or whatever)...

            tried moving the CARP VIPs (all of them) to pfsense02 with - again - zero luck

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • B
              bryanpedini
              last edited by

              PS: fuck IPv4 - it doesn't work - IPv6 works fine just fine from all three machines pinging google.com (tho only from the WAN interface, the other IP addresses are routed to the CARP VIP so I suppose it's normal it doesn't work)

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

                Hmm, I assume that IP you are NATing to is the CARP VIP?

                On the primary node that works check the states created when it checks for updates. What source IP is it using? The CARP VIP?

                We did see issues with the primary IP address on an interface moving to a VIP on it but that should be solved. Also I never saw it affect pkg operations.

                B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • B
                  bryanpedini @stephenw10
                  last edited by

                  @stephenw10 yes, but actually not really...

                  the configuration is like this:
                  10.10.0.1 is the CARP VIP of the interface
                  213.137.54.24/29 (to be exact 8 single /32 IPs) are virtual IPs based on the CARP VIP

                  this is done to more quickly move all the IPs following the CARP VIP and to minimize CARP traffic between the firewalls

                  @stephenw10 said in nat/firewall/ha not working:

                  On the primary node that works check the states created when it checks for updates

                  with three machines and that many interfaces there are too much states to go through to analyze
                  can you share the update servers' subnet? is 208.123.73.212 part of it? (if so, from the states it seems the source IP is 10.10.0.2, the IP of the interface, so not NATted)

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

                    Ah so the IPs from 213.137.54.24/29 are IPAliases that are on the 10.10.0.1 CARP VIP?

                    What is NATing the 10.10.0.X subnet then, some upstream router?

                    If there's nothing NATing that then the nodes would have to use IPs from the public /29 directly. But since those are on the CARP VIP only the master node can use it.

                    Why not use IPs from the /29 directly on the nodes?

                    B 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • stephenw10S stephenw10 referenced this topic on
                    • B
                      bryanpedini @stephenw10
                      last edited by

                      @stephenw10 said in nat/firewall/ha not working:

                      What is NATing the 10.10.0.X subnet then, some upstream router?

                      correct, the Cisco router

                      @stephenw10 said in nat/firewall/ha not working:

                      Why not use IPs from the /29 directly on the nodes?

                      a. to have all of them available
                      b. there will be no /29, I'm slowly migrating services to a single /32

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

                        Hmm, then there should be no problem with them using the primary IP in the 10.10.0X subnet as long as it' not the CARP VIP.

                        Do you not see states at all on the other nodes?

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