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

    pfSense not responding to icmp ping from switch

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    20 Posts 4 Posters 739 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.
    • johnpozJ
      johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @ryansun
      last edited by

      @ryansun yeah my bad - miss read.. doh

      But where is that 192.168.1.26 IP coming from? Also disable those pfblocker rules.. Can you ping now?

      Your going to have to setup a name server on your switch if you want to do dns, I personally wouldn't use dhcp for a switch.. But it should work - just don't see any config for a nameserver, if it got it from dhcp - you would think it should list it ;)

      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

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • R
        ryansun @johnpoz
        last edited by

        @johnpoz
        "But where id the 192.168.1.26 come from?" - I misconfigured a virtual ip - should've used 192.168.1.26/24 instead of 192.168.1.26/32. However after correcting it (now LAN subnets shows 192.168.1.0/24 only) the issue is still there

        "Your one pfblocker reject rule has some hits to pfb_pri1_v4, does this have rfc1918 space in, that for sure would block the switch from pinging pfsense IP." - Negative. Also if this rule is blocking icmp from lan how could other devices successfully ping pfsense?

        ffdd4016-a6f1-495a-808d-b0057ebed4fd-image.png

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

          @ryansun very true if your pfblocker was block, your other clients wouldn't be able to ping pfsense eitehr.. odd one.. that is the correct mac for pfsense in your arp table?

          edit: what are you running pfsense on - that mac shows as

          eac AUTOMATION-CONSULTING GmbH

          Never heard of them.. You would think it would be a known mac of network interfaces..

          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

          R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • R
            ryansun @johnpoz
            last edited by

            @johnpoz It is the right mac address. Pfsense is running on a protectli box

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

              @ryansun odd one..

              Your not running snort or suricatad by chance? Ie an IPS package of pfsense.

              Are you running + version of pfsense and maybe enable the ethernet filtering, ie layer 2 stuff?

              Hmmmm?

              Are you doing anything with static arp? You say pfsense can ping the switch 192.168.1.4, look in the arp table - is this the correct mac for the switch? But if that was the case - you would still think you would see it in the sniff..

              If I had to guess something is blocking pfsense from seeing the ping request, while it shows up on the interface you see it in the sniff - maybe its not going farther up the stack for pfsense to send a response.. Or maybe for whatever reason its sending it out a different interface.. You don't have any vpn correction on pfsense?

              And you don't show anything in the log for the icmp being blocked?

              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

              R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • R
                ryansun @johnpoz
                last edited by

                @johnpoz VPN was the issue! I set up an IPSec site to site tunnel long ago. It turns out the ip address assigned to switch (192.168.1.4) is being used by the vpn tunnel. This also explains the strange behavior that the switch but switch does not show up in arp table in pfsense, even after doing a "fresh" ping.

                After assigning switch a different ip, ping and dns are working as expected. Thank you for your help!

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

                  @ryansun great! I wouldn't use any sort of tunnel network that overlaps with your local network.. Is the remote network also 192.168.1?

                  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

                  R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • R
                    ryansun @johnpoz
                    last edited by

                    @johnpoz No, the remote network is a different subnet. My understanding is that those IPs serve as the "default gateway" to remote subnet, since I use BGP for routing between the local and remote networks. This (I think) was the link I was trying to follow at that time: https://support.oracle.com/knowledge/Oracle%20Cloud/2488578_1.html (Need a free account to access)

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

                      Yes it would still conflict if that IP is used as the transport subnet for a routed IPSec tunnel. That's why many services (like AWS) use APIPA addresses for that to prevent any possibility of a conflict.

                      johnpozJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                      • johnpozJ
                        johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @stephenw10
                        last edited by johnpoz

                        @stephenw10 sdwan company we used for few customers at last gig used the documentation network...

                        192.0.2.0/24

                        For the tunnels to make didn't overlap with sites of the customer network.

                        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

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.