Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login
    Introducing Netgate Nexus: Multi-Instance Management at Your Fingertips.

    Firwall rules using aliases

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Firewalling
    6 Posts 4 Posters 1.3k 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.
    • D Offline
      drick78
      last edited by

      I have taken a somewhat 'paranoid' policy on the network to only allow traffic to connect from certain IP ranges by defining them in an 'allow_connect' alias and then using that in my firewall rules.  This is working pretty well, but when I need to make a change to the alias – add another range of IPs that are allowed to connect, I can't seem to make the changes take affect on the firewall side.  How do I force a refresh of this so the rules are truly updated?

      Dell C6100 w/ 2 x Xeon E5430 quad-core, 6GB RAM

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • KOMK Offline
        KOM
        last edited by

        Reset the states affected by going to Diagnostics - States.  Filter for the ones you want (so you don't interrupt other connections) and then reset them.  New connections will abide by thenew rules.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • D Offline
          drick78
          last edited by

          Tried that without success.  I even tried adding an easy rule to allow the connection through, and it still won't connect.  Other ideas?

          Dell C6100 w/ 2 x Xeon E5430 quad-core, 6GB RAM

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • D Offline
            drick78
            last edited by

            I was able to get it working.  I entered the new CIDR address wrong.  Clearing the state table did take care of it once I had that fixed.  Thank you for the help.

            A question about CIDR, what is the differenct between saying something like this: x.x.x.1/16 vs x.x.x.0/16 ?

            Dell C6100 w/ 2 x Xeon E5430 quad-core, 6GB RAM

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • P Offline
              phil.davis
              last edited by

              A question about CIDR, what is the differenct between saying something like this: x.x.x.1/16 vs x.x.x.0/16 ?

              When specifying a subnet (rather than a host) it does not make a difference. "/16" is saying to take notice of only the top 16 bits (first 2 numbers). 99% of router software should cope with either in its configuration, but the convention is to write x.x.x.0/16

              When specifying a specific host IP, then you have to specify the whole address and network prefix x.x.x.1/16

              As the Greek philosopher Isosceles used to say, "There are 3 sides to every triangle."
              If I helped you, then help someone else - buy someone a gift from the INF catalog http://secure.inf.org/gifts/usd/

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • DerelictD Offline
                Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
                last edited by

                And you only have to reset states to kill existing connections that you have removed pass rules for.  If you make a rule more permissive, allowing new connections, you don't have to reset states.  They will be passed when the connection is attempted.

                Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
                A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
                DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
                Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • First post
                  Last post
                Copyright 2026 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.