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

    CARP and asymetric routing issues: ICMP redirect + dropped connection

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved HA/CARP/VIPs
    1 Posts 1 Posters 1.9k 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.
    • L Offline
      ldperron
      last edited by

      Hi community! We are having a weird issue here (both version 2.1 and 2.1.3).

      We have a couple of servers here that has a pfSense CARP VIP as default gateway, and it leads us sometimes to connection to be dropped by pfSense during bulk TCP transfer, when communicating with another VLAN. We have an asymetrical routing setup, with static routes in the pfSense that points to our layer 3 switch. Of course, the Bypass firewall rules for traffic on the same interface checkbox is active, and problem is occuring whether scrubbing is enabled or not.

      First issue: the pfSense does sends ICMP redirect properly for static routes that lands within the same interface as the sending device. Unfortunately, the ICMP redirect is coming from the pfsense Interface's main IP address, instead of the CARP IP address. Consequence: the ICMP redirect packet is being rejected by most kernels. Is there a way to fix that?

      Second issue: TCP connections works properly up to a certain point. The pfSense stops forwarding to the layer3 switch after a certain amount of payload data sent through the TCP connection (around 90 kB). We are able to reproduce a connection drop on demnad (puppet agent to puppet master communication).

      If I insert a firewall rule on the LAN interface that matches puppet server TCP port, and select Sloppy state, the problem is gone. So I don't understand why state matters in that situation, since I checked the bypass firewall rules for traffic on the same interface. Any idea?

      Thanks

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