Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - ns

#1
Hello,

I've the following situation:

* two firewalls
* in total one incoming wireguard VPN endpoint that is bound to carp
* one outgoing wireguard VPN *per* device that should always be up, if the machine is running

The problem is that with HA sync, by default all wireguard VPNs are up on the primary machine:

- fw1: incoming, outgoing1, outgoing2
- fw2: -

I then thought, ok I can try to have ONE carp address on fw2 that is the MASTER by default instead of fw1. However, it seems that the HA-Sync always modifies the advskew so that the secondary firewall is slower. Even setting it to 254 on the master only sets it to 254 on the backup.

Then I thought maybe I can create a binding to an IP alias on each machine, however wireguard does not support that.

In the end, what I want to have is:

- fw1: outgoing1
- fw2: outgoing2
- active/master/primary fw: incoming

How do I achieve this with opnsense?
#2
The firewall rule interface drop down menu allows to select the different physical interfaces, "IPSec", but does not allow to match on a wireguard interface.

From the shell I can see that there is a wg1 interface, so in theory opnsense could match on it.

My use case: I want to whitelist access to specific ports from the connected VPN (road warrior) clients to other devices opnsense is connected to.
#3
That matches with my observation, but I fail to understand what causes that problem on opnsense, because in the end it's just a GUI + FreeBSD - or am I mistaken?
#4
Hello,

when adding the full routing table to an DEC4040, the system needs ca. 5 minutes to just display the content of netstat -nr. A lot of network related operations such as fetch time out sometime as well.

root@router1:~ # date; netstat -nr|wc -l; date
Thu Oct  6 09:28:26 CEST 2022
1041529
Thu Oct  6 09:33:18 CEST 2022
root@router1:~ #


Is there any tuning that needs to be done for the system to support the full routing table?

Best regards,

Nico