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

    Endpoint-independent Outbound NAT (eimnat) rules

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Plus 25.11 Snapshots
    9 Posts 3 Posters 139 Views 2 Watching
    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.
    • luckman212L Offline
      luckman212 LAYER 8
      last edited by luckman212

      pfSense+ 25.11 (and 2.9.0) introduce Endpoint-independent Outbound NAT—aka Full Cone (related redmine #16517)

      I'm waiting for this upstream commit to land in snapshots to be able to test it without causing a kernel panic on my 6100. In the meantime: does anyone have any examples of how an Outbound NAT rule should look when using this?

      E.g.
      • can or should "Static Port" be enabled at the same time as EIM?
      • is udp/* ok, or is it better to narrowly target only specific ports?
      • any other tips or guidance on this new feature?

      3ed6a830-3114-42fe-b5a7-34310ca84177-screenshot_Dp5FwrKn.png

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • M Offline
        marcosm Netgate
        last edited by

        When testing the PS5 and Switch 2 I did not need to check "Static Port". To achieve NAT Type 2/B I only checked EIM-NAT and configured UPnP.

        luckman212L 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • luckman212L Offline
          luckman212 LAYER 8 @marcosm
          last edited by

          @marcosm Thanks, I'm testing with 25.11.r.20251118.1708 now

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • luckman212L Offline
            luckman212 LAYER 8 @marcosm
            last edited by luckman212

            @marcosm Is UPnP still needed though? I thought part of the appeal of EIM NAT was that we didn't need UPnP...

            I enabled just eim, flushed my state table and ran a few online tests, but not sure it's working for me... all sites are reporting me as being behind a "Port Restricted Cone NAT"

            eg https://natchecker.com or https://whatsmynat.com

            d0ff601f-2ead-4000-82b6-9891ed9c8b6e-screenshot_wZ6bwauZ.png

            I also tested with some commandline tools I found, e.g. stunner and nat-detect

            With EIMNAT checkbox enabled

            $ nat-detect
               nat_type: PortRestrictedCone
            public_addr: 70.18.xxx.xxx:26787
            

            Tested again without EIMNAT, and it reports symmetric:

            $ nat-detect
               nat_type: Symmetric
            public_addr: 70.18.xxx.xxx:46689
            

            So it's definitely changing the behavior. Not sure if it should be possible to achieve FullCone however...

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • Bob.DigB Offline
              Bob.Dig LAYER 8
              last edited by Bob.Dig

              I did the upgrade to the RC this morning, coming from 25.07.1. I then enabled Endpoint-independent Outbound NAT for my machine and pfSense crashed. And it crashed on every boot so I had to use the zfs-snapshot feature.

              Dump header from device: /dev/gpt/swap1
                Architecture: amd64
                Architecture Version: 4
                Dump Length: 381952
                Blocksize: 512
                Compression: none
                Dumptime: 2025-11-19 10:51:17 +0100
                Hostname: pfSense.internal
                Magic: FreeBSD Text Dump
                Version String: FreeBSD 16.0-CURRENT #33 plus-RELENG_25_11-n256497-084b5f7b7bcd: Tue Nov 18 17:18:00 UTC 2025
                  root@pfsense-build-release-amd64-1.eng.atx.netgate.com:/var/jenkins/workspace/pfSense-Plus-s
                Panic String: page fault
                Dump Parity: 1574524171
                Bounds: 0
                Dump Status: good
              

              I saved the dumps if they are of interest.

              I will give 25.11 RC another chance without using this feature.

              luckman212L M 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • luckman212L Offline
                luckman212 LAYER 8 @Bob.Dig
                last edited by

                @Bob.Dig could you post a screenshot of how you configured your EIMNAT rule? Did you have Static Port checked? Seems like you're hitting the same bug I encountered before.

                Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • Bob.DigB Offline
                  Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @luckman212
                  last edited by Bob.Dig

                  @luckman212 Yep, I had static port enabled too.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • M Offline
                    marcosm Netgate @Bob.Dig
                    last edited by

                    @Bob.Dig The crash can be uploaded here:
                    https://nc.netgate.com/nextcloud/s/FGaJJ3bHDTnTi5Q

                    @luckman212 EIM may not be sufficient because as I understand it EIM only deals with the mapping. There is still the matter of allowing (e.g. inbound) connections through the filter which UPnP helps with. FWIW I didn't see the Switch 2 even try UPnP. With EIM (no port forwards, static port unchecked) it showed NAT Type B, without EIM it showed NAT Type D.

                    Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • Bob.DigB Offline
                      Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @marcosm
                      last edited by

                      @marcosm said in Endpoint-independent Outbound NAT (eimnat) rules:

                      The crash can be uploaded here:

                      Done.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.