32

Hey, folks! I had begun configuring VLANs recently, and I've got two managed switches between my firewall and my mini PC. I set up a 10 VLAN on the third octet with a /24 mask, and the idea is that anything on 10 should be able to reach the internet but not VLAN 1, while VLAN 1 should be able to access the internet and VLAN 10 services. I'm not so crazy as to try to start with that configuration though. No ports or anything are exposed yet, so my first test was just going to be full access between networks. I maybe counted my initial configuration as a success too soon, because with the mini PC on the 10 network, I can reach the gateway at 192.168.10.1 but nothing else. I can even access the OPNsense config page at the 10 gateway address. If I ping 192.168.1.1, I get "Network is unreachable". If I ping www.google.com, I get "Temporary failure in name resolution", and I also can't pull up sites like YouTube. And again, this is all with a VLAN rule that I believed to be configured to allow all traffic, as it mimics what's set up for my default LAN interface. Pinging the mini PC from the 1 VLAN also fails; it just sort of times out with 100% packet loss, so perhaps the default rule is less permissive than I thought, but it does say it allows all.

I've been following beginner guides from the Home Network Guy (a name that makes this stuff sound more approachable than how he actually presents it), but even with a video that's not even 3 years old, pieces of OPNsense have been deprecated and replaced with new components such that I can't follow along verbatim. For instance, it was an ordeal to get DHCP working now that the one he used has been replaced with Dnsmasque DNS and DHCP, and I can't even tell you what I changed that eventually got it working, but my first couple of tries did not. In one of those videos I've been following, he indicates that the default rule on the LAN interface will allow full access between all networks, but that doesn't seem to be the case, as the same settings on the other VLAN aren't allowing them to talk to one another.

Obviously, I don't intend to leave full access between the networks when it's time to go live, but this simple smoke test shows that there's a gap in my understanding if I can't get what should be the easiest test to work. Does anyone know what I'm missing or what I should do to troubleshoot from here?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Decronym@lemmy.decronym.xyz 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

Fewer Letters More Letters
DHCP Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol, automates assignment of IPs when connecting to a network
DNS Domain Name Service/System
ISP Internet Service Provider

3 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 13 acronyms.

[Thread #44 for this comm, first seen 6th Jul 2026, 18:50] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]

this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2026
32 points (97.1% liked)

Selfhosted

60482 readers
574 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:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS