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

    IP Routing in 2.0 RC3

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    3 Posts 2 Posters 1.5k 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.
    • A Offline
      ahopkins
      last edited by

      Hello

      I am in the process of testing pfsense for deployment however have very strange results when setting up ip routing on the system.

      I have added the route (10.0.0.0/8 172.29.1.10) and you will see on the traceroute it does not goto the 172.29.1.10 as the first hop it goes to the default gateway (172.29.1.1)!? You will see below the route table and traceroute results.

      If there is anything I can do to provide more information I am more than happy to help.

      [2.0-RC3][admin@pfsense.localdomain]/root(3): netstat -rn
      Routing tables

      Internet:
      Destination        Gateway            Flags    Refs      Use  Netif Expire
      default            172.29.1.1        UGS        0  355198    em0
      10.0.0.0/8        172.29.1.10        UGS        0      106    em0
      127.0.0.1          link#4            UH          0      195    lo0
      172.29.1.0/24      link#1            U          0    42374    em0
      172.29.1.63        link#1            UHS        0        0    lo0
      172.29.2.0/24      172.29.1.10        UGS        0      222    em0
      192.168.100.0/24  link#3            U          0  316259    em2
      192.168.100.1      link#3            UHS        0        0    lo0

      Internet6:
      Destination                      Gateway                      Flags      Netif Expire
      ::1                              ::1                          UH          lo0
      fe80::%em0/64                    link#1                        U          em0
      fe80::213:72ff:fe4f:b772%em0      link#1                        UHS        lo0
      fe80::%em2/64                    link#3                        U          em2
      fe80::20e:cff:fea9:a3b3%em2      link#3                        UHS        lo0
      fe80::%lo0/64                    link#4                        U          lo0
      fe80::1%lo0                      link#4                        UHS        lo0
      ff01:1::/32                      fe80::213:72ff:fe4f:b772%em0  U          em0
      ff01:3::/32                      fe80::20e:cff:fea9:a3b3%em2  U          em2
      ff01:4::/32                      ::1                          U          lo0
      ff02::%em0/32                    fe80::213:72ff:fe4f:b772%em0  U          em0
      ff02::%em2/32                    fe80::20e:cff:fea9:a3b3%em2  U          em2
      ff02::%lo0/32                    ::1                          U          lo0
      [2.0-RC3][admin@pfsense.localdomain]/root(4):

      [2.0-RC3][admin@pfsense.localdomain]/root(4): traceroute 10.30.0.151
      traceroute to 10.30.0.151 (10.30.0.151), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets
      1  172.29.1.1 (172.29.1.1)  1.103 ms  0.476 ms  0.475 ms
      2  172.29.1.10 (172.29.1.10)  0.971 ms  0.930 ms  0.977 ms
      3  *^C
      [2.0-RC3][admin@pfsense.localdomain]/root(5):
      [2.0-RC3][admin@pfsense.localdomain]/root(5):

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • E Offline
        eri--
        last edited by

        Do you have any policy routing in place?

        Other than that you'd have to explain your setup more to have the right answer.
        One suggestion out of nowhere is to add a rule in floating rules with direction out and destination your static route destination.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • A Offline
          ahopkins
          last edited by

          Thank you for the response. I did try it with policy routing and without, however. Another google search of the forums have found that setting 'Bypass firewall rules for traffic on the same interface' will (and has) corrected this behaviour.

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