Setting up a VLAN part 2
-
Congratulations! ;D
I'm not sure what the difference might be between 'No' and 'Forbid'. :-\ I'd have to read the manual to try and find out. What switch model is it?
The ping command uses the IGMP protocol. You can allow it specifically by setting a firewall rule with 'protocol - IGMP' or include it in a rule with 'protocol - *'.
Yes, it's all firewall rules at this point. ;)
It's interesting that this worked and previous things didn't. It seems to confirm the fact that tagged and untagged packets on the same NIC can be a problem.
Are all your NICs exactly the same?Steve
-
Congratulations! ;D
I'm not sure what the difference might be between 'No' and 'Forbid'. :-\ I'd have to read the manual to try and find out. What switch model is it?
The ping command uses the IGMP protocol. You can allow it specifically by setting a firewall rule with 'protocol - IGMP' or include it in a rule with 'protocol - *'.
Yes, it's all firewall rules at this point. ;)
It's interesting that this worked and previous things didn't. It seems to confirm the fact that tagged and untagged packets on the same NIC can be a problem.
Are all your NICs exactly the same?Steve
mabye i wasnt tagging/untagging properly last time. there was some back and forth between configuration, i might have been tagging/untagging for the wrong wiring configuration.
or maybe i was doing it right and the card isnt vlan friendly, not sure.
the on board NIC on the motherboard is probably different than the two NICs that i have in the PCI slots. the two NICs in the PCI slots are identical (re1, re2).
i am not worried about the LAN rules being as open as they are, if anything this is a 'test' lab, but i am going to go and enforce some rules to deny traffic between networks.
i want to do two things now that i got this far:
1- figure out why vlan 100 was T U U U E E E E and not T T T T E E E E. you wrote your your explanation, but i need to read it again. this goes back to why vlans were confusing me. i assumed the 4 ports i wanted on vlan100 would be tagged for vlan100, but for some reason it is only the port that talks to the pfsense vlan100 NIC. the E's make sense in both vlan1 and 100. Even the Us in vlan 1 make sense.
2- now that i got the vlan working, i want to test a second vlan on NIC re1 (2 vlans on 1 NIC.). i am going to create vlan200 and see if i can get that working (but not until i focus more time on 1 to better understand the tagging/untagging. if i dont get that figured out, there is no point in moving forward.
the switch with the No/Forbid is a HP ProCurve Switch 2810-24 G.
-
Ok, reading the relevant manual for that switch:
http://ftp.hp.com/pub/networking/software/2810-AdvTrafficMgmt-July2007-59914733.pdfFor static VLANs, which we are using here, No is equivalent to Exclude.
You would only use 'forbid' when using Dymanic VLANs (see GVRP). This is way beyond my experience is something that you're very unlikely to need. ;)Steve
-
Ok, reading the relevant manual for that switch:
http://ftp.hp.com/pub/networking/software/2810-AdvTrafficMgmt-July2007-59914733.pdfFor static VLANs, which we are using here, No is equivalent to Exclude.
You would only use 'forbid' when using Dymanic VLANs (see GVRP). This is way beyond my experience is something that you're very unlikely to need. ;)Steve
yeah, i agree, i was going to stick with no.
-
The three different port modes are like this as I understand it, though I don't actually have an HP switch:
E - Exclude this port from VLANX. I.e. any packets arriving on the port from outside tagged VLANX will be disgarded and any packets inside the switch tagged VLANX will not switched to this port.
U - Untagged port. I.e. packets in the switch tagged VLANX can be switched to this port and will have tags removed when leaving. Untagged packets arriving on this port will be tagged VLANX upon entering the switch.
T - Tagged port. Packets tagged VLANX inside the switch can be switched to this port and leave the switch still tagged. Packets arriving at the switch tagged VLANX are allowed to enter.
Confusingly this this port type is also referred to as a trunk port because it can be a member of many vlans carrying all traffic to your router.In the switch configuration packets arriving at ports 2, 3 or 4 will be tagged VLAN100 as they enter the switch. They can then be switched to any other port participating in VLAN100 (1-4). If the packet is addressed to the internet somewhere it will be switched to port 1 where it leaves the switch still tagged and arrives at re1 where the pfSense VLAN100 interface is setup to receive it and route it appropriately.
Returning packets are sent to the switch from pfSense tagged VLAN100. Port 1 allows them to enter the switch and they are switched to the correct port. On leaving the port (2-4) the VLAN tagging removed so that the pakets arrive back at the client untagged and able to received.
Steve
ok, if i am understanding this correct, will my next vlan look like this?
vlan1- E E E E E E U U (re2) ports 7,8 operate on 192.168.1.x
vlan 100- T U U U E E E E (re1) ports 1,2,3,4 operate on 10.10.10.x
vlan 200- T E E E U U E E (re1) ports 5,6 operate on 172.10.10.x (new VLAN i will create)
my only question (assuming i did it right) is…am i right in tagging port 1 in vlan100 and vlan200 since it shares the same cable/nic to pfsense?
-
Yes looks good. :)
In this setup you will have only one port available for 192.168.1.X clients since the other is linked back to re2. This means you can still access the switch GUI on that subnet though.Steve
-
Yes looks good. :)
In this setup you will have only one port available for 192.168.1.X clients since the other is linked back to re2. This means you can still access the switch GUI on that subnet though.Steve
ok good, i think i am picking up on vlans.
actually, that one port plugs into a 16 port netgear switch, so anything on that switch is also 192 and will also be able to hit pfsense since it is on the 192.168.1.x subnet.
EDIT- so for every additional vlan i create, port 1 will always be tagged, assuming the vlan connects back to the same NIC in pfsense? i only bring it up because the other hp switch i have access to has 24 ports, so i can create more vlans and assign them to re1. and if i did that, port 1 in every vlan would always be tagged, right?…..that is what i gathered after reading this:
T - Tagged port. Packets tagged VLANX inside the switch can be switched to this port and leave the switch still tagged. Packets arriving at the switch tagged VLANX are allowed to enter.
Confusingly this this port type is also referred to as a trunk port because it can be a member of many vlans carrying all traffic to your router. -
@tomdlgns:
ok good, i think i am picking up on vlans.
Yep. ;)
@tomdlgns:
actually, that one port plugs into a 16 port netgear switch, so anything on that switch is also 192 and will also be able to hit pfsense since it is on the 192.168.1.x subnet.
Not a problem then.
@tomdlgns:
EDIT- so for every additional vlan i create, port 1 will always be tagged, assuming the vlan connects back to the same NIC in pfsense? i only bring it up because the other hp switch i have access to has 24 ports, so i can create more vlans and assign them to re1. and if i did that, port 1 in every vlan would always be tagged, right?
Yes you always need to add the pfSense connection as a tagged port in order to allow VLAN tagged packets to make it back pfSense where it can be received by the VLAN interface.
Assuming port1 is connected to re1, and that re1 has VLAN interfaces setup on it (as it is currently) then yes you would add this as tagged to every VLAN. (except VLAN1!)
Once you have a good grip on this you can try something interesting like connecting your second switch to the first one. Then it's possible to send VLANs between the switches using tagged ports on the connecting cable. But one step at a time! ;)
Steve
-
@tomdlgns:
ok good, i think i am picking up on vlans.
Yep. ;)
@tomdlgns:
actually, that one port plugs into a 16 port netgear switch, so anything on that switch is also 192 and will also be able to hit pfsense since it is on the 192.168.1.x subnet.
Not a problem then.
@tomdlgns:
EDIT- so for every additional vlan i create, port 1 will always be tagged, assuming the vlan connects back to the same NIC in pfsense? i only bring it up because the other hp switch i have access to has 24 ports, so i can create more vlans and assign them to re1. and if i did that, port 1 in every vlan would always be tagged, right?
Yes you always need to add the pfSense connection as a tagged port in order to allow VLAN tagged packets to make it back pfSense where it can be received by the VLAN interface.
Assuming port1 is connected to re1, and that re1 has VLAN interfaces setup on it (as it is currently) then yes you would add this as tagged to every VLAN. (except VLAN1!)
Once you have a good grip on this you can try something interesting like connecting your second switch to the first one. Then it's possible to send VLANs between the switches using tagged ports on the connecting cable. But one step at a time! ;)
Steve
Assuming port1 is connected to re1, and that re1 has VLAN interfaces setup on it (as it is currently) then yes you would add this as tagged to every VLAN. (except VLAN1!)
correct, vlan1 is untouched from what i have above.
Once you have a good grip on this you can try something interesting like connecting your second switch to the first one. Then it's possible to send VLANs between the switches using tagged ports on the connecting cable. But one step at a time! ;)
this is exactly the next thing i was going to try once i got vlan200 setup. i wont even ask my question until i can successfully get vlan200 up and online.
thanks for the help.
-
so you finally had it?
-
so you finally had it?
i finally got it, yes.
Edit- or are you asking if i have had enough of vlans? ???
-
no no, i just ask that you got it working. Congrats, hopefully i could help you even a bit
-
ok, just added a 24 port vlan switch and added a 3rd vlan…vlan 200 172.10.10.x
now that i figured out the tagging/untagging, it was pretty easy to configure the switch.
i must say, documentation is key with vlans. i logged into the switch and used the port name and wrote in the vlan it belongs to, but i also have it written down on paper.
this is what my switch config looks like (this switch doesnt use E for exclude, it uses N, which has been posted already).
vlan1- U U U U U U U U N N N N N N- 192.168.1.x
vlan100- N N N N N N N N T U U U N N- 10.10.10.x
vlan200- N N N N N N N N T N N N U U- 172.10.10.xi was able to hit the internet with a PC using a dhcp address from the 172 range and i stopped at 14 ports.
now that i got the hang of this, linking another VLAN switch should be easy. i just need to make sure that i tag the ports on the other switch to work with the respective vlans...1, 100, 200
-
That's true until you hit unmanaged switch, then you can use only one vlan on that port of managed switch and that should be untagged
-
That's true until you hit unmanaged switch, then you can use only one vlan on that port of managed switch and that should be untagged
right, if i want to do multiple vlans on other switches they need to be vlan switches. i follow what you are saying.
right now one of the untagged ports for vlan1 is plugged into a 16 port netgear switch, that switch can only operate on 1 subnet since it isnt vlan capable, in this case 192.168.1.x.
-
finished adding some block rules to stop traffic between vlans. disabled it one way to test, enabled it again, did some more testing, the rules did exactly what they were suppose to do.
dns question- i can ping other IPs, but i cant browse by going to \pc-name
any idea what i need to do to get that working?
i can access \ip-address w/o any issues, which is why i assume DNS.
the dhcp server settings for LAN is what i used as a template for vlan100 and 200 and my LAN DNS lookups work fine.
-
where you do have dns setup?
@tomdlgns:
right now one of the untagged ports for vlan1 is plugged into a 16 port netgear switch, that switch can only operate on 1 subnet since it isnt vlan capable, in this case 192.168.1.x.
You can also use another vlan if you require
-
I assume you are using DNS forwarding on pfSense for your DNS service. That's the default.
You can have pfSense add any client that sends it's host name to the local DNS table.
Go to Services: DNS Forwarder: and check 'Register DHCP leases in DNS forwarder'.This will only kick in when clients renew their DHCP lease so you may have to force that to test.
Steve
-
where you do have dns setup?
it is the default setup. the only thing i did was point to OpenDNS servers for lookups (and removed the first entry of 127.0.0.1).
-
I assume you are using DNS forwarding on pfSense for your DNS service. That's the default.
You can have pfSense add any client that sends it's host name to the local DNS table.
Go to Services: DNS Forwarder: and check 'Register DHCP leases in DNS forwarder'.This will only kick in when clients renew their DHCP lease so you may have to force that to test.
Steve
ok, just did this, i will delete DHCP leases and remote reboot machines and see if that fixes it.
EDIT- now that i think of it…the device i was trying to access by hostname was statically assigned, this option looks like it is only DHCP related. that device will never ask for a new address since it is static.