Hi,
I´ve got a 1.2.3 pfSense connected this way:
XP > [LAN] PFSense [WAN] ---> [WAN] Cisco router [LAN]
I can ping from XP to LAN and WAN pfsense interfaces, but cannot ping WAN
Cisco router interface
I can ping from PFSense WAN to Cisco WAN interface
Can not ping from XP to Cisco Router WA
I may not be the best person to comment on this, but have you enabled a rule
for your LAN interfaces to be able to talk with the WAN interface machines
(the Cisco router)? Bridging would fix this because the two interfaces would
essentially be bonded together. and wouldn't need a rule to enable tra
I have disable firewalling so i supposed no rules or NAT are applying
Under System \ Advanced i checked disable firewall
Disable all packet filtering.
Note: This converts pfSense into a routing only platform!
Note: This will turn off NAT!
In any case in both interfaces there any any permit
Regad
Have you configured the Cisco router with a static route to the XP's network?
Rgds,
On 2011-01-21, Danny wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I´ve got a 1.2.3 pfSense connected this way:
>
> XP > [LAN] PFSense [WAN] ---> [WAN] Cisco router [LAN]
>
> I can ping from XP to LAN and WAN pfsense interfaces, but can
Yes.
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 FasthEthernet 0/0
Surprisingly, it started working without doing aparently nothing I will
recreate the situation again, because the environment is virtual pfsense,
virtual XP, with VMWare using GNS3... maybe that causes that weird
behaviour.
thanks a lot
Rgards
Op 21-1-2011 13:19, Danny schreef:
Yes.
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 FasthEthernet 0/0
err, no, there should be route to the public netblock you are using on
the LAN behind pfsense, pointing to the WAN of pfSense which will be in
the Cisco LAN subnet.
Also note that Ciscos have really long arp
No. It´s working with that default route, Not necessary to route specific
LAN behind pfSense, and no I did not reboot the router
Thanks a lot
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Seth Mos wrote:
> Op 21-1-2011 13:19, Danny schreef:
>
> Yes.
>> ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 FasthEthernet 0/0
>>
>
> err,
Mmm... according to Cisco:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a00800ef7b2.shtml
you shouldn't do an ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 to an interface.
The page I linked above gives some explanations why. One key problem
is that with 0x8 to an interface, *all* addresses are c
