Yes. If you want to reach another subnet behind a router on NIC2 then yes you need to add a static route.

I would be very grateful if someone could help me out with the above question, I understand that it might me off-topic, but this is the only issue left before our pfsense works just as needed…

regards  Tor

Now say that I have three lan nics (in addition to wan).  Nic1 at 192.168.10.1, Nic2 at 192.168.15.1 and Nic3 at 192.168.20.1, both Nic1 and Nic3 with default rules as of wan access (Internet works ok)..

In addition, any traffic from either Nic1 or Nic3 to subnet 192.168.30.0/24 should be routed via Nic2.  Nic2 is connected to another router with ip 192.168.15.254.  (Another port on that other router is connected to the 192.168.30.0/24 subnet which Ni1 and Nic3 need to communicate with).

Do I use static routes or nat in this case?  Traffic to the 192.168.30.0/24 subnet from workstations connected to Nic1 and Nic3 should be routed via 192.168.20.254 to find the 192.168.30.0/24 net.

Thanks a lot if someone can comment on this

Tor

Pc–>--cable--->---nic--->---pfsense rule---->--nic2--->--cable2-->--pc2

So if you place the default lan rule on nic every bits and bytes will hit pc2 so to speak. To do it so makes sense in the case that we have the internet and seldom know where to go.

OK, but isn't everything blocked by default?

Yes it is…If you have no rules on nic the traffic form pc can't go anywhere....

hope it helps :)

Block rule Source=Lan1 net destination=Lan2 net

OK, but isn't everything blocked by default?

I thought I just had to write access rules, say, to allow only http and ftp requests from LAN1 and LAN2 clients to CommonNet:

Interface LAN1: Source=LAN1 Dest=CommonNet SourcePort=20,21,80
Interface LAN2: Source=LAN2 Dest=CommonNet SourcePort=20,21,80

Comments, please ;-)

rgds

Tor

Block rule Source=Lan1 net destination=Lan2 net