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

VTI gateways not adding static routes in 24.03

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IPsec
88 Posts 5 Posters 16.4k Views
Loading More Posts
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic was forked from 24.03 causes issue with remote VPN stephenw10 May 15, 2024, 10:34 PM
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • S
    stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
    last edited by May 21, 2024, 12:04 PM

    Right, I agree with that. So these are all route mode devices the tunnels are connected to? In which case why are you using 0/0 for the P2s? 😕

    O 1 Reply Last reply May 21, 2024, 12:26 PM Reply Quote 0
    • O
      OhYeah 0 @stephenw10
      last edited by May 21, 2024, 12:26 PM

      @stephenw10 said in VTI gateways in 24.03:

      So these are all route mode devices the tunnels are connected to? In which case why are you using 0/0 for the P2s?

      Yes, all the spokes are connected to the hub via 0/0. Except for end-user remote access VPN which is a separate virtual network and then routed to the hub via parent router LAN/IPSEC (Fortinet because it offers 365/Entra integration).

      As to why use 0/0 for P2s... tried it out with pfsense and a couple of ISPs/partners and found out it works incredibly well across multiple platforms.

      If that mode of VPN setup is suddenly not supported anymore, I would like to hear the reasoning behind this change. At the moment it sounds more like a bug. :)

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • S
        stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
        last edited by May 21, 2024, 12:39 PM

        Hmm, curious. The only time I've ever seen that is when one side of the tunnel is using policy mode. Otherwise having a local interface defined as 0/0 could potentially break routing entirely.

        However I'm not aware of any specific change in 24.03 that would prevent it if it worked in 23.09. It's unlikely a setup like that was ever tested though. Let me see what I can find....

        O 1 Reply Last reply May 22, 2024, 11:12 AM Reply Quote 0
        • O
          OhYeah 0 @stephenw10
          last edited by May 22, 2024, 11:12 AM

          @stephenw10 said in VTI gateways in 24.03:

          However I'm not aware of any specific change in 24.03 that would prevent it if it worked in 23.09. It's unlikely a setup like that was ever tested though.

          I can provide also some logs/data from routers that are running 23.09, if it would help to figure out what actually changed.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • N
            Nikkeli
            last edited by May 23, 2024, 8:40 AM

            I'm also having problems with static routes not being loaded on boot.
            However they get loaded after editing and saving routes (without changes), after which the tunnel works as intended.

            I have IPsec VTI with local/remote networks set to "address".
            Issue appeared after upgrade from 23.09.1 with no changes to configuration between upgrades.

            I can post more information if needed.

            L 1 Reply Last reply May 23, 2024, 11:58 AM Reply Quote 0
            • O
              OhYeah 0
              last edited by May 23, 2024, 10:22 AM

              Maybe it's also a good idea to change the title of the topic to include the phrase "static routes"?

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • L
                LarryFahnoe @Nikkeli
                last edited by May 23, 2024, 11:58 AM

                @Nikkeli Your situation sounds a lot like mine.

                Might be interesting to take a peek at your /cf/conf/config.xml and compare it to what I showed above in https://forum.netgate.com/post/1170175

                Do you have a spurious <gateway_item> with a <gateway> containing an address rather than "dynamic"?

                I have on my "spare time list" (ahem!) to roll back to 23.09.1, then do the upgrade again and document how the config changes. I suspect there is a bug in the upgrade process.

                @stephenw10 I'd vote for adding "static routes" to the title of this thread if possible.

                --Larry

                N 1 Reply Last reply May 23, 2024, 12:21 PM Reply Quote 1
                • N
                  Nikkeli @LarryFahnoe
                  last edited by Nikkeli May 23, 2024, 12:23 PM May 23, 2024, 12:21 PM

                  @LarryFahnoe
                  I actually don't have this problem, the configuration seems fine. Below is the configuration for the only (vti) gateway listed.

                  <gateway_item>
                  <interface>opt10</interface>
                  <gateway></gateway>
                  <name>IPSEC_VT13_VT10_VTIV4</name>
                  <weight>1</weight>
                  <ipprotocol>inet</ipprotocol>
                  <descr><![CDATA[Interface IPSEC_VT13_VT10_VTIV4 Gateway]]></descr>
                  <gw_down_kill_states></gw_down_kill_states>
                  </gateway_item>
                  
                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • S
                    stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                    last edited by May 23, 2024, 12:37 PM

                    So no additional gateways? No disabled gateways?

                    N 1 Reply Last reply May 23, 2024, 12:44 PM Reply Quote 0
                    • N
                      Nikkeli @stephenw10
                      last edited by May 23, 2024, 12:44 PM

                      @stephenw10
                      The only other gateway is WAN gateway. No gateways are disabled.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • S
                        stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                        last edited by May 23, 2024, 1:04 PM

                        Hmm, any errors in the routing or system logs at boot?

                        N 1 Reply Last reply May 24, 2024, 10:24 AM Reply Quote 0
                        • N
                          Nikkeli @stephenw10
                          last edited by May 24, 2024, 10:24 AM

                          @stephenw10
                          On System/General I can actually see some errors/warnings that seem to be relevant. On other logs I could not find anything relevant.
                          IPsec logging has too much log noise but I can turn that down aswell and reboot, if you think it could help.

                          Here is System/General logging after booting, with the relevant lines.

                          May 24 10:11:27 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: route_add_or_change: Invalid gateway and/or network interface ipsec1
                          May 24 10:11:27 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: route_add_or_change: Invalid gateway and/or network interface ipsec1
                          May 24 10:11:27 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: route_add_or_change: Invalid gateway and/or network interface ipsec1
                          May 24 10:11:27 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: Gateway, NONE AVAILABLE
                          May 24 10:11:27 	syslogd 		kernel boot file is /boot/kernel/kernel
                          May 24 10:11:27 	syslogd 		exiting on signal 15
                          May 24 10:11:26 	kernel 		done.
                          May 24 10:11:26 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: Creating rrd update script
                          May 24 10:11:24 	kernel 		.done.
                          May 24 10:11:24 	check_reload_status 	650 	Restarting IPsec tunnels
                          May 24 10:11:24 	kernel 		...
                          May 24 10:11:15 	kernel 		done.
                          May 24 10:11:15 	check_reload_status 	650 	Updating all dyndns
                          May 24 10:11:14 	kernel 		done.
                          May 24 10:11:14 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: NTPD is starting up.
                          May 24 10:11:08 	kernel 		done.
                          May 24 10:11:08 	kernel 		done.
                          May 24 10:11:08 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: sync unbound done.
                          May 24 10:11:07 	kernel 		done.
                          May 24 10:11:07 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: route_add_or_change: Invalid gateway and/or network interface ipsec1
                          May 24 10:11:07 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: route_add_or_change: Invalid gateway and/or network interface ipsec1
                          May 24 10:11:07 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: route_add_or_change: Invalid gateway and/or network interface ipsec1
                          May 24 10:11:07 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: Gateway, NONE AVAILABLE
                          May 24 10:11:07 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: Default gateway setting as default.
                          
                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • O
                            OhYeah 0
                            last edited by May 24, 2024, 11:05 AM

                            Rebooted device, went through the logs to see if I catch something that might be relevant (Netgate 4100).

                            May 24 13:53:46	php-cgi	678	rc.bootup: The command '/sbin/ifconfig 'ipsec1' inet '0.0.0.0/0' '0.0.0.0'' returned exit code '1', the output was 'ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): Destination address required'
                            May 24 13:53:46	php-cgi	678	rc.bootup: Gateway, NONE AVAILABLE
                            May 24 13:53:46	php-cgi	678	rc.bootup: Gateway, NONE AVAILABLE
                            May 24 13:53:46	kernel		route: message indicates error: Invalid argument
                            
                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • S
                              stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                              last edited by May 24, 2024, 12:16 PM

                              Ah, there we go. Yup that's pretty much what I'd expect when trying to use 0/0. It tries to apply it to the interfaces and fails because it's invalid there.

                              The interesting thing is how that ever worked in 23.09. 🤔

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • O
                                OhYeah 0
                                last edited by May 24, 2024, 4:36 PM

                                And these are similar messages from a Netgate 4100 running 23.09:

                                May 24 19:26:59	php-cgi	466	rc.bootup: The command '/sbin/ifconfig 'ipsec2' inet '0.0.0.0/0' '0.0.0.0/0'' returned exit code '1', the output was 'ifconfig: 0.0.0.0/0: bad value'
                                May 24 19:26:59	php-cgi	466	rc.bootup: Gateway, NONE AVAILABLE
                                

                                The message is very slightly different, so I assume it must be meaningful in some way.

                                I also got offered 24.03_1 on the same device but no release notes yet?

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • S
                                  stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                  last edited by May 24, 2024, 4:46 PM

                                  Hmm, interesting. Presumably you don't see the route errors in 23.09?:

                                  May 24 10:11:07 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: route_add_or_change: Invalid gateway and/or network interface ipsec1
                                  May 24 10:11:07 	php-cgi 	685 	rc.bootup: route_add_or_change: Invalid gateway and/or network interface ipsec1
                                  

                                  The patch 1 update is a no-op for amd64 devices. It applies only to aarch64. It won't change anything here.

                                  O 2 Replies Last reply May 24, 2024, 5:25 PM Reply Quote 0
                                  • O
                                    OhYeah 0 @stephenw10
                                    last edited by May 24, 2024, 5:25 PM

                                    @stephenw10 said in VTI gateways in 24.03:

                                    Hmm, interesting. Presumably you don't see the route errors in 23.09?

                                    Nope, didn't see any..

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • O
                                      OhYeah 0 @stephenw10
                                      last edited by May 24, 2024, 5:45 PM

                                      This post is deleted!
                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • O
                                        OhYeah 0
                                        last edited by May 30, 2024, 9:51 AM

                                        Any news from devs regarding this issue? Well actually two issues I guess.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • S
                                          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                          last edited by May 30, 2024, 12:28 PM

                                          Not yet. In all honesty it's pretty low priority because VTI / Static routes are working as intended in 24.03. Using 0/0 for both ends of the tunnel subnet was never a supported setup.

                                          It is curious that is changed though.

                                          The issue with disabled gateways causing a problem is a bigger issue since that happens in the expected config. Updates there should be shown on the bug report: https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/15449

                                          O 1 Reply Last reply May 30, 2024, 12:35 PM Reply Quote 1
                                          74 out of 88
                                          • First post
                                            74/88
                                            Last post
                                          Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.
                                            This community forum collects and processes your personal information.
                                            consent.not_received