this post was submitted on 27 May 2024
18 points (95.0% liked)

Selfhosted

40296 readers
239 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

One is the route from my Proxmox (vimes) server to my NAS, (colon) going via my Router (pessimal) (as it should be) Second one is my NAS going to Proxmox directly. However I didn't set any static routes and this is causing issues as the Router Firewalls those Asymmetric Connections. This is happening since I upgraded Proxmox... I am not the best at network stuff, so if someone has some pointers I'd be most grateful.

I'm a moron and had a wrong subnet mask.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] towerful@programming.dev 10 points 5 months ago (3 children)

If they are on the same subnet, why are they going via the router? Surely the NIC/OS will know it's a local address within its subnet, and will send it directly; as opposed to not knowing where to send the packet, so letting the router deal with it.

I'm assuming you are using a standard 24 bit subnet mask, because you haven't provided anything that indicates otherwise and the issue you present would be indicative of a local link being used - this possible

[–] genuineparts@infosec.pub 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

You got it perfectly right! It was the subnetting... Thanks!

[–] towerful@programming.dev 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That whole "shortest path" has caught me out before (tho in a different way)!
And firewall logs of "state violation" aren't always helpful when that's pretty much the default log message

[–] genuineparts@infosec.pub 1 points 5 months ago

Absolutely. But I at least realized it had to be asymmetric routing... because if I didn't I would have been even more puzzled. Because even setting firewall rules wouldn't fix it then. I'm glad there are people here that understand that sometimes we brain fart and they give you a great pointer! Like the second I saw netmask I knew what was wrong and facepalmed.