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

    PfSense IAX trixbox

    Firewalling
    3
    19
    7.3k
    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.
    • N
      northflux2
      last edited by

      Hi all,

      Im new to pfsense and have searched a lot for an answer to my issue.

      Essentially my topology looks like this:

      ISP  –->  myRouter --->  pfSense (static IP) --- myLAN -->  trixbox (static IP)

      when pfsense firewall is running my trixbox is not getting any connections at all.
      nothing is logged in the firewall logs.

      I can dump the traffic on my ISPs router (thanks to AAISP)  and I can see they are trying to talk to me :

      19:33:17.244624 Tx length 65: [ses 0xb977] IP (0x0021), length 45: ThereIP.4569 > myTrixBoxIP.4569: UDP, length 15

      but nothing comes through.

      If I add a mad rule to allow all source, all destinations, all ports to my pfSense fw still nothing comes through.

      If I disable the pfsense fw System: Advanced:  Disable all packet filtering.  tick

      All works fine! (but no point having a firewall if your going to disable it)

      This is pfSense 1.2.3 installed.

      Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

      Thanks

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • D
        danswartz
        last edited by

        You should port forward UDP/4569 to your trixbox, and add a rule allowing that (you can default that to on with a checkbox).  Did you do that?

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • N
          northflux2
          last edited by

          Hi thanks for coming back.

          No I hadn't configured any port forwarding as my IP on the trixbox is configured with a static routable IP which is configured on the external VOIP provider.

          I had assumed as long as UDP port 4569 was open as a fw rule to that IP, that would be all that was required?

          I have now configured a port forward (still not working) although Im not sure why I'd need to manually specify that traffic coming into the WAN interface destined for

          x.y.z.205:4569  would not be allowed to pass to x.y.z.205:4569

          Any ideas or hints would be appreciated.

          Thanks again.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • D
            danswartz
            last edited by

            I think I need to be de-confused here.  I assumed your trixbox was behind a firewall using NAT (which is usually the case.)  If not, can you more clearly describe how the plumbing fits together?

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • N
              northflux2
              last edited by

              Hi,

              Sorry didnt mean to confuse - no NAT at all on this network everything is routable static IP's.

              Say (example IP's):

              Gateway IP is    XX.155.38.193
              trixbox IP is:    XX.155.38.205

              pf Red    is:        XX.155.38.206  router is plugged into this
              pf Green is:        XX.155.38.207  lan is plugged into this

              then

              VOIP External Trunk provider knows to forward inbound calls to:  XX.155.38.205

              I can see the traffic leaving the ISP router to XX.155.38.205

              This is a dump from there router:

              19:33:17.244624 Tx length 65: [ses 0xb977] IP (0x0021), length 45: ThereIP.4569 > XX.155.38.205.4569: UDP, length 15

              I have a firewall rule specified to allow:

              PASS
              Proto:          UDP
              Source:        ALL
              Destination:  XX.155.38.205
              Port:            4569

              I thought this should mean that all traffic coming into XX.155.38.206 (red) would be allowed unmolested to XX.155.38.207 and onto the lan

              If I do a similar rule as above

              PASS
              Proto:          TCP
              Source:        ALL
              Destination:  XX.155.38.205
              Port:            22

              Then I have no problem at all getting a sh on the trixbox from outside the network.
              All other services on this network IMAP servers, Oracle servers, wiki etc….  non have a problem with this kind of config.

              If I turn off the pf System: Advanced:  Disable all packet filtering.  tick

              Then inbound calls also work fine.  This evidence coupled with the ISP router dump is what makes me believe its a pf problem.

              Hope this is clearer.

              Again thanks for your help.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • D
                danswartz
                last edited by

                okay, thanks.  does anything show up in the pfsense log when this is happening.  if you do a packet capture on the pfsense LAN, do you see anything?

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • N
                  northflux2
                  last edited by

                  Hi,

                  No nothing in the logs.

                  I've just done two capture runs whilst trying to dial in.  One on the wan and one the lan:

                  WAN Packet capture

                  18:44:38.362921 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2 > 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a, ethertype ARP (0x0806), length 60: arp who-has XX.155.38.205 tell XX.155.38.193
                  18:44:38.362953 00:17:3f:9b:dd:25 > 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2, ethertype ARP (0x0806), length 42: arp reply XX.155.38.205 is-at 00:17:3f:9b:dd:25
                  18:44:38.363038 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a > 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2, ethertype ARP (0x0806), length 60: arp reply XX.155.38.205 is-at 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a

                  LAN Packet capture

                  18:45:53.097058 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a > 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 60: (tos 0xb8, ttl 64, id 57558, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 40) XX.155.38.205.4569 > externalVOIPProviderIP.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 12
                  18:45:54.099425 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a > 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 60: (tos 0xb8, ttl 64, id 57559, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 40) XX.155.38.205.4569 > externalVOIPProviderIP4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 12
                  18:45:58.096821 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a > 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2, ethertype ARP (0x0806), length 60: arp who-has XX.155.38.193 tell XX.155.38.205
                  18:45:58.097115 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2 > 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a, ethertype ARP (0x0806), length 60: arp reply XX.155.38.193 is-at 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2
                  18:46:04.926321 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2 > 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a, ethertype ARP (0x0806), length 60: arp who-has XX.155.38.205 tell XX.155.38.193
                  18:46:04.926415 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a > 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2, ethertype ARP (0x0806), length 60: arp reply XX.155.38.205 is-at 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a

                  Does that help?

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • D
                    danswartz
                    last edited by

                    Is this a transparent bridge setup?  I am seeing something weird.  They are ARP'ing for your trixbox, and two replies are being sent back, for two different MAC addresses.  ????

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • N
                      northflux2
                      last edited by

                      Hi,

                      This is the trace when pf filtering is disabled and it works:

                      WAN Packet capture

                      18:54:13.801050 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2 > 00:17:3f:9b:dd:25, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 151: (tos 0x0, ttl 58, id 47889, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 137) externalVOIPProviderIP.4569 > XX.155.38.205.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 109
                      18:54:13.802783 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a > 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 60: (tos 0xb8, ttl 64, id 57608, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 46) XX.155.38.205.4569 > externalVOIPProviderIP.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 18
                      18:54:13.817037 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2 > 00:17:3f:9b:dd:25, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 60: (tos 0x0, ttl 58, id 47890, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 40) externalVOIPProviderIP.4569 > XX.155.38.205.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 12
                      18:54:14.025257 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a > 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 60: (tos 0xb8, ttl 64, id 57609, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 40) XX.155.38.205.4569 > externalVOIPProviderIP.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 12
                      18:54:14.039055 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2 > 00:17:3f:9b:dd:25, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 60: (tos 0x0, ttl 58, id 47891, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 40) externalVOIPProviderIP.4569 > XX.155.38.205.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 12
                      18:54:15.211999 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a > 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 60: (tos 0xb8, ttl 64, id 57610, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 40) XX.155.38.205.4569 > externalVOIPProviderIP.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 12
                      18:54:15.225562 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2 > 00:17:3f:9b:dd:25, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 60: (tos 0x0, ttl 58, id 47892, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 40) externalVOIPProviderIP.4569 > XX.155.38.205.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 12

                      LAN Packet capture

                      18:54:53.213152 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a > 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 60: (tos 0xb8, ttl 64, id 57612, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 40) XX.155.38.205.4569 > externalVOIPProviderIP.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 12
                      18:54:53.229437 00:17:3f:9c:24:fc > 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 54: (tos 0x0, ttl 57, id 47894, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 40) externalVOIPProviderIP.4569 > XX.155.38.205.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 12
                      18:54:53.229626 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a > 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 60: (tos 0xb8, ttl 64, id 57613, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 40) XX.155.38.205.4569 > externalVOIPProviderIP.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 12
                      18:54:54.353898 00:17:3f:9c:24:fc > 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 151: (tos 0x0, ttl 57, id 47895, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 137) externalVOIPProviderIP.4569 > XX.155.38.205.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 109
                      18:54:54.355513 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a > 00:24:b2:3d:d8:f2, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 60: (tos 0xb8, ttl 64, id 57614, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 46) XX.155.38.205.4569 > externalVOIPProviderIP.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 18
                      18:54:54.369374 00:17:3f:9c:24:fc > 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800), length 54: (tos 0x0, ttl 57, id 47896, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 40) externalVOIPProviderIP.4569 > XX.155.38.205.4569: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 12

                      How can i check the transparent bridge?   sorry if this is a stupid question!

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • N
                        northflux2
                        last edited by

                        If you mean is the LAN interface bridged with the WAN then yes.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • D
                          danswartz
                          last edited by

                          yes, that is what i meant.  can you post the mac addresses of the two pfsense nics as well as the trixbox nic?

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • N
                            northflux2
                            last edited by

                            trixbox:

                            eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:1A:92:29:2E:5A

                            pfsense:

                            re0: flags=8943 <up,broadcast,running,promisc,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                            options=389b <rxcsum,txcsum,vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum,wol_ucast,wol_mcast,wol_magic>ether 00:17:3f:9b:dd:25

                            re1: flags=8943 <up,broadcast,running,promisc,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                            options=389b <rxcsum,txcsum,vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum,wol_ucast,wol_mcast,wol_magic>ether 00:17:3f:9c:24:fc

                            bridge0: flags=8843 <up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast>metric 0 mtu 1500
                            ether 0e:67:bb:99:2b:ab</up,broadcast,running,simplex,multicast></rxcsum,txcsum,vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum,wol_ucast,wol_mcast,wol_magic></up,broadcast,running,promisc,simplex,multicast></rxcsum,txcsum,vlan_mtu,vlan_hwtagging,vlan_hwcsum,wol_ucast,wol_mcast,wol_magic></up,broadcast,running,promisc,simplex,multicast>

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • D
                              danswartz
                              last edited by

                              this is weird.  it's like the pfsense is doing some kind of proxy arp.  what does your config look like?

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • N
                                northflux2
                                last edited by

                                I've just removed the NAT rule, which i mistakenly thought you wanted me to put in last night:

                                19:22:46.583484 arp who-has XX.155.38.205 tell XX.155.38.193
                                19:22:46.583855 arp reply XX.155.38.205 is-at 00:1a:92:29:2e:5a

                                Now its only replying with the one MAC much more sensible.

                                What do you mean "config look like"  firewall?

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • D
                                  danswartz
                                  last edited by

                                  yeah, sorry, that was when i thought it was a NAT setup.  i assume it still does not work?  if so, it might be good to reboot the pfsense just to make sure everything is clean.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • N
                                    northflux2
                                    last edited by

                                    Hi,

                                    Sorry had to go away for a few days.  I've rebooted the pf box and yes - unfortunately exactly still the same problem.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • D
                                      danswartz
                                      last edited by

                                      Can you take another packet trace?

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • N
                                        northflux2
                                        last edited by

                                        Thanks for all your help.

                                        Finally got it.

                                        In case this causes anyone else a problem:

                                        FW –> NAT --> Outbound --> Manual Outbound NAT rule generation

                                        And I should have.

                                        Deleted the existing default rule.

                                        Thanks again.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • K
                                          kartook
                                          last edited by

                                          ;D thanks i am here for the same kind a problem .Got a solution through this .

                                          Thanks Team
                                          K~

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