Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal configuration

2019-06-11 Thread Fabrice Durand via PacketFence-users

Hello Felipe,


Le 19-06-11 à 13 h 08, Felipe Rodrigues via PacketFence-users a écrit :

Hi guys,

Just help me to clarify one thing:

- The registration interface is isolated in packetfence right? Does 
this interface need internet access or need to access the ip adress 
configured on the network detection page?


Yes the registration interface is isolated from the other interfaces by 
iptables (except if you enable passthrough) and devices on the 
registration network doesn't need to go on internet or on the network 
detection ip address.


I ask this because apparently the CoA process is working properly. I 
can see the disconnect packets being forwarded via Wireshark and via 
packetfence log (Both ways), but the device is taking a while to do 
the VLAN exchange. With this delay, I believe the device tries to do 
the "network detection", but it's still in the vlan of registration, 
so I'm seeing this error.


After the CoA, do you see a new radius authentication coming from the WLC ?

Regards

Fabrice





Detail: I'm just doing tests on MAC devices (Iphone and Macbook Pro). 
I will try to test with an Android device to validate this question.


Thanks!


*De:* Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users 


*Enviado:* terça-feira, 11 de junho de 2019 10:58
*Para:* packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
*Cc:* Ivan Saliu
*Assunto:* Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive 
Portal configuration


Hi Fabrice,

Thanks for the tip, changed the parameter and now also this is working 
fine


Ivan

*From:*Durand fabrice via PacketFence-users 
[mailto:packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net]

*Sent:* martedì 11 giugno 2019 03:24
*To:* packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
*Cc:* Durand fabrice 
*Subject:* Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive 
Portal configuration


Hello Ivan,

Le 19-06-10 à 15 h 01, Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users a écrit :

Hi Nicholas and Felipe (hopefully you stuck with us),

So now I’ve understood what I was doing wrong and it was just so
stupid that I can’t even…

Basically I did two things:

-I put the custom port for CoA (1700 on Cisco WLCs…why use
standards…) on the field Disconnect Port (Policies and Access
Control -> Network Devices -> Switches -> My WLC).
I found from the packetfence.log file that it was working only the
authentication, but the VLAN switch was of course not working
since it does a CoA de-authentication to move the VLAN.


-Also the second step was also to put Advanced Access
Configuration -> Captive Portal in the IP field the Registration
interface IP otherwise it wouldn’t recognize in any case internet
access.

Right now the captive portal is working fine, I do have some more
things that worries me that I noticed from the packetfence.log
file like the following error: Unable to extract SSID of
Called-Station-ID, which if persist actually makes more difficult
for me to distinguish between SSID and present a different captive
portal for other users, but these are a lot less painful issues
than the one that I’ve just solved.

You just need to fix the format of the Called-Station-Id attribute in 
the WLC config.


Regards

Fabrice

Thanks again Nicholas for your support, as you said it was indeed
a configuration issue,

Hope you all had a nice day,

Ivan

*From:*Ivan Saliu
*Sent:* lunedì 10 giugno 2019 15:47
*To:* packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
*Cc:* 'Nicholas Pier' <09np...@gmail.com> <mailto:09np...@gmail.com>
*Subject:* RE: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive
Portal configuration

Hi Nicholas,

The issue is the second one you pointed out:

  * If they disconnect and reconnect to the wireless, are they
assigned the correct VLAN / IP ? This might mean that
packetfence is properly associating the new role with the
user, but the controller isn't getting dynamically updated.

They get the proper IP address….so the issue is when PacketFence
needs to update the VLAN via Radius?

Still don’t get why the behavior is this one, I’ve checked and the
Deauthentication Method is set as RADIUS, Use CoA is enabled, and
I even put into the CoA port 1700 since Cisco’s WLC uses that.

The only thing that is missing is the Controller IP address field
but I don’t think this should cause the issue.

Ivan

*From:*Nicholas Pier [mailto:09np...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* lunedì 10 giugno 2019 13:58
*To:* Ivan Saliu mailto:ivan.sa...@kikocosmetics.com>>
*Cc:* packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
*Subject:* Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive
Portal configuration

Hi Ivan,

Let's st

Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal configuration

2019-06-11 Thread Felipe Rodrigues via PacketFence-users
Hi guys,

Just help me to clarify one thing:

- The registration interface is isolated in packetfence right? Does this 
interface need internet access or need to access the ip adress configured on 
the network detection page?

I ask this because apparently the CoA process is working properly. I can see 
the disconnect packets being forwarded via Wireshark and via packetfence log 
(Both ways), but the device is taking a while to do the VLAN exchange. With 
this delay, I believe the device tries to do the "network detection", but it's 
still in the vlan of registration, so I'm seeing this error.

Detail: I'm just doing tests on MAC devices (Iphone and Macbook Pro). I will 
try to test with an Android device to validate this question.

Thanks!


De: Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users 
Enviado: terça-feira, 11 de junho de 2019 10:58
Para: packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: Ivan Saliu
Assunto: Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal 
configuration


Hi Fabrice,



Thanks for the tip, changed the parameter and now also this is working fine



Ivan



From: Durand fabrice via PacketFence-users 
[mailto:packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
Sent: martedì 11 giugno 2019 03:24
To: packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: Durand fabrice 
Subject: Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal 
configuration



Hello Ivan,

Le 19-06-10 à 15 h 01, Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users a écrit :

Hi Nicholas and Felipe (hopefully you stuck with us),



So now I’ve understood what I was doing wrong and it was just so stupid that I 
can’t even…



Basically I did two things:



-  I put the custom port for CoA (1700 on Cisco WLCs…why use 
standards…) on the field Disconnect Port (Policies and Access Control -> 
Network Devices -> Switches -> My WLC).
I found from the packetfence.log file that it was working only the 
authentication, but the VLAN switch was of course not working since it does a 
CoA de-authentication to move the VLAN.



-  Also the second step was also to put Advanced Access Configuration 
-> Captive Portal in the IP field the Registration interface IP otherwise it 
wouldn’t recognize in any case internet access.



Right now the captive portal is working fine, I do have some more things that 
worries me that I noticed from the packetfence.log file like the following 
error: Unable to extract SSID of Called-Station-ID, which if persist actually 
makes more difficult for me to distinguish between SSID and present a different 
captive portal for other users, but these are a lot less painful issues than 
the one that I’ve just solved.



You just need to fix the format of the Called-Station-Id attribute in the WLC 
config.

Regards

Fabrice



Thanks again Nicholas for your support, as you said it was indeed a 
configuration issue,



Hope you all had a nice day,

Ivan



From: Ivan Saliu
Sent: lunedì 10 giugno 2019 15:47
To: 
packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
Cc: 'Nicholas Pier' <09np...@gmail.com><mailto:09np...@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal 
configuration



Hi Nicholas,



The issue is the second one you pointed out:

  *   If they disconnect and reconnect to the wireless, are they assigned the 
correct VLAN / IP ? This might mean that packetfence is properly associating 
the new role with the user, but the controller isn't getting dynamically 
updated.

They get the proper IP address….so the issue is when PacketFence needs to 
update the VLAN via Radius?



Still don’t get why the behavior is this one, I’ve checked and the 
Deauthentication Method is set as RADIUS, Use CoA is enabled, and I even put 
into the CoA port 1700 since Cisco’s WLC uses that.

The only thing that is missing is the Controller IP address field but I don’t 
think this should cause the issue.

Ivan



From: Nicholas Pier [mailto:09np...@gmail.com]
Sent: lunedì 10 giugno 2019 13:58
To: Ivan Saliu 
mailto:ivan.sa...@kikocosmetics.com>>
Cc: 
packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal 
configuration



Hi Ivan,



Let's start with what's supposed to happen immediately after a login:



Packetfence should reauthorize the user and send a message to the controller to 
change the role / vlan. This re-authroization is configured on both the 
controller and "switch" object in packetfence. Once this comes, the client 
needs to obtain a new IP address on the new subnet.



A few questions then:

  *   Does the client lose network access immediately after the 
re-authorization? This might indicate a client/controller-side issue if they're 
not getting a new dhcp lease quickly enough.
  *   If they disconnect and reconnect to the wireless, are they assigned the 
co

Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal configuration

2019-06-11 Thread Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users
Hi Fabrice,

Thanks for the tip, changed the parameter and now also this is working fine

Ivan

From: Durand fabrice via PacketFence-users 
[mailto:packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net]
Sent: martedì 11 giugno 2019 03:24
To: packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: Durand fabrice 
Subject: Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal 
configuration


Hello Ivan,
Le 19-06-10 à 15 h 01, Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users a écrit :
Hi Nicholas and Felipe (hopefully you stuck with us),

So now I’ve understood what I was doing wrong and it was just so stupid that I 
can’t even…

Basically I did two things:


-  I put the custom port for CoA (1700 on Cisco WLCs…why use 
standards…) on the field Disconnect Port (Policies and Access Control -> 
Network Devices -> Switches -> My WLC).
I found from the packetfence.log file that it was working only the 
authentication, but the VLAN switch was of course not working since it does a 
CoA de-authentication to move the VLAN.



-  Also the second step was also to put Advanced Access Configuration 
-> Captive Portal in the IP field the Registration interface IP otherwise it 
wouldn’t recognize in any case internet access.

Right now the captive portal is working fine, I do have some more things that 
worries me that I noticed from the packetfence.log file like the following 
error: Unable to extract SSID of Called-Station-ID, which if persist actually 
makes more difficult for me to distinguish between SSID and present a different 
captive portal for other users, but these are a lot less painful issues than 
the one that I’ve just solved.


You just need to fix the format of the Called-Station-Id attribute in the WLC 
config.

Regards

Fabrice


Thanks again Nicholas for your support, as you said it was indeed a 
configuration issue,

Hope you all had a nice day,
Ivan

From: Ivan Saliu
Sent: lunedì 10 giugno 2019 15:47
To: 
packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
Cc: 'Nicholas Pier' <09np...@gmail.com><mailto:09np...@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal 
configuration

Hi Nicholas,

The issue is the second one you pointed out:

  *   If they disconnect and reconnect to the wireless, are they assigned the 
correct VLAN / IP ? This might mean that packetfence is properly associating 
the new role with the user, but the controller isn't getting dynamically 
updated.
They get the proper IP address….so the issue is when PacketFence needs to 
update the VLAN via Radius?

Still don’t get why the behavior is this one, I’ve checked and the 
Deauthentication Method is set as RADIUS, Use CoA is enabled, and I even put 
into the CoA port 1700 since Cisco’s WLC uses that.
The only thing that is missing is the Controller IP address field but I don’t 
think this should cause the issue.

Ivan

From: Nicholas Pier [mailto:09np...@gmail.com]
Sent: lunedì 10 giugno 2019 13:58
To: Ivan Saliu 
mailto:ivan.sa...@kikocosmetics.com>>
Cc: 
packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal 
configuration

Hi Ivan,

Let's start with what's supposed to happen immediately after a login:

Packetfence should reauthorize the user and send a message to the controller to 
change the role / vlan. This re-authroization is configured on both the 
controller and "switch" object in packetfence. Once this comes, the client 
needs to obtain a new IP address on the new subnet.

A few questions then:

  *   Does the client lose network access immediately after the 
re-authorization? This might indicate a client/controller-side issue if they're 
not getting a new dhcp lease quickly enough.
  *   If they disconnect and reconnect to the wireless, are they assigned the 
correct VLAN / IP ? This might mean that packetfence is properly associating 
the new role with the user, but the controller isn't getting dynamically 
updated.

My "gut" is that this isn't a problem with the way packetfence is deployed (I 
prefer multiple interfaces, even in VMware), but rather with the controller or 
"switch" configuration in packetfence. I'd work to verify that SNMP or Radius 
messages are being sent from packetfence to re-authroize the user and move them 
to the right VLAN. I think the preferred re-authorization is Radius or CoA 
since the network configuration guide doesn't mention SNMO read-write 
configuration. Can you look at the audit tab and verify that packetfence sends 
a radius message to the controller after login? Similarly, the "switch" config 
object should have Radius selected from the drop-down for re-authroization.

As for the switch, I think it's easiest to not give the switch an SVI IP (vlan 
interface) and let packetfence do the work. This way you don't need to worry 
about the routing imp

Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal configuration

2019-06-10 Thread Durand fabrice via PacketFence-users

Hello Ivan,

Le 19-06-10 à 15 h 01, Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users a écrit :


Hi Nicholas and Felipe (hopefully you stuck with us),

So now I’ve understood what I was doing wrong and it was just so 
stupid that I can’t even…


Basically I did two things:

-I put the custom port for CoA (1700 on Cisco WLCs…why use standards…) 
on the field Disconnect Port (Policies and Access Control -> Network 
Devices -> Switches -> My WLC).
I found from the packetfence.log file that it was working only the 
authentication, but the VLAN switch was of course not working since it 
does a CoA de-authentication to move the VLAN.


-Also the second step was also to put Advanced Access Configuration -> 
Captive Portal in the IP field the Registration interface IP otherwise 
it wouldn’t recognize in any case internet access.


Right now the captive portal is working fine, I do have some more 
things that worries me that I noticed from the packetfence.log file 
like the following error: Unable to extract SSID of Called-Station-ID, 
which if persist actually makes more difficult for me to distinguish 
between SSID and present a different captive portal for other users, 
but these are a lot less painful issues than the one that I’ve just 
solved.


You just need to fix the format of the Called-Station-Id attribute in 
the WLC config.


Regards

Fabrice


Thanks again Nicholas for your support, as you said it was indeed a 
configuration issue,


Hope you all had a nice day,

Ivan

*From:*Ivan Saliu
*Sent:* lunedì 10 giugno 2019 15:47
*To:* packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
*Cc:* 'Nicholas Pier' <09np...@gmail.com>
*Subject:* RE: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive 
Portal configuration


Hi Nicholas,

The issue is the second one you pointed out:

  * If they disconnect and reconnect to the wireless, are they
assigned the correct VLAN / IP ? This might mean that packetfence
is properly associating the new role with the user, but the
controller isn't getting dynamically updated.

They get the proper IP address….so the issue is when PacketFence needs 
to update the VLAN via Radius?


Still don’t get why the behavior is this one, I’ve checked and the 
Deauthentication Method is set as RADIUS, Use CoA is enabled, and I 
even put into the CoA port 1700 since Cisco’s WLC uses that.


The only thing that is missing is the Controller IP address field but 
I don’t think this should cause the issue.


Ivan

*From:*Nicholas Pier [mailto:09np...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* lunedì 10 giugno 2019 13:58
*To:* Ivan Saliu <mailto:ivan.sa...@kikocosmetics.com>>
*Cc:* packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net 
<mailto:packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
*Subject:* Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive 
Portal configuration


Hi Ivan,

Let's start with what's supposed to happen immediately after a login:

Packetfence should reauthorize the user and send a message to the 
controller to change the role / vlan. This re-authroization is 
configured on both the controller and "switch" object in packetfence. 
Once this comes, the client needs to obtain a new IP address on the 
new subnet.


A few questions then:

  * Does the client lose network access immediately after the
re-authorization? This might indicate a client/controller-side
issue if they're not getting a new dhcp lease quickly enough.
  * If they disconnect and reconnect to the wireless, are they
assigned the correct VLAN / IP ? This might mean that packetfence
is properly associating the new role with the user, but the
controller isn't getting dynamically updated.

My "gut" is that this isn't a problem with the way packetfence is 
deployed (I prefer multiple interfaces, even in VMware), but rather 
with the controller or "switch" configuration in packetfence. I'd work 
to verify that SNMP or Radius messages are being sent from packetfence 
to re-authroize the user and move them to the right VLAN. I think the 
preferred re-authorization is Radius or CoA since the network 
configuration guide doesn't mention SNMO read-write configuration. Can 
you look at the audit tab and verify that packetfence sends a radius 
message to the controller after login? Similarly, the "switch" config 
object should have Radius selected from the drop-down for 
re-authroization.


As for the switch, I think it's easiest to not give the switch an SVI 
IP (vlan interface) and let packetfence do the work. This way you 
don't need to worry about the routing implications of packetfence 
having multiple NICs with their own routes, and the ACLs that are 
required to isolate a client and only allow communication to 
packetfence. It's just easier. However, if you need to scale to a 
multi-site deployment and can't tag the registration VLAN end to end, 
a routed deployment may become necessary.


Best wishes,

*Nicholas P. Pier*
Network & Virtualization Engineer
/CCNP RS, PCSNSE7, VCI

Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal configuration

2019-06-10 Thread Nicholas Pier via PacketFence-users
Felipe,

What are you using to de-authorize the port? Radius? CoA? SNMP? Also,
what's the make of the switch?

I've had the best luck with physical ports using SNMP because it typically
"downs" the port before "upping" it. This causes the client to request a
new DHCP lease and avoids some of the issues with CoA.

A caveat is devices connected through phone switchports. It can be
inconvenient if someone is on the phone with the helpdesk when their phone
and PC go up/down.

I hope this is helpful,

*Nicholas P. Pier*
Network & Virtualization Engineer
*CCNP RS, PCSNSE7, VCIX6-DCV, VCIX6-NV*


On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 9:50 AM Felipe Rodrigues via PacketFence-users <
packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> I have the same problem here. I have been using one physical interface in
> my scenario with a Registration and Isolation VLAN associated to this
> interface. The portal works great and I can see the Disconnect-Request and
> Disconnect-ACK via Wireshark.
>
> The problem is the same: The client is not redirected to the new VLAN. If
> I disconnected and connected again, than I received the correct VLAN.
>
> Any Ideia?
>
>
> --
> *De:* Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users <
> packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
> *Enviado:* segunda-feira, 10 de junho de 2019 05:51
> *Para:* packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> *Cc:* Ivan Saliu
> *Assunto:* Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal
> configuration
>
>
> Hi Nicholas,
>
>
>
> I do agree with you that the flow should be that one.
>
> So far I’ve noticed that these points works perfectly:
>
>- User connects to SSID and is sent to registration VLAN if their node
>isn't pre-registered. If the node has been registered, the go immediately
>to the VLAN associated with their role and this flow stops.
>- If they're sent to the registation VLAN:
>   - Packetfence provides DHCP and DNS for registration VLAN.
>   - DNS queries from the client are leveraged to redirect them to
>   packetfence for captive portal. Most modern browsers and OSs should
>   do this automatically.
>
>
>
> After these one though I get to the login page, I log in successfully but
> I get the error: Unable to detect network connectivity try restarting your
> web browser or opening a new tab to see if your access has been
> successfully enabled.
>
> After this I’m stuck, the client is not redirected to the new VLAN and I
> keep the old IP Address.
>
>
>
> PacketFence is deployed in the following way:
>
>
>
> 2 NICs, one NIC operates as a Management interface with Radius and DHCP
> Daemons listening here. The 2nd NIC operates as a Registration Interface,
> does DNS and DHCP.
>
>
>
> This is deployed in Hyper-V so this is a forced mode, I cannot use a
> single interface and build on top VLANs since Hyper-V doesn’t support
> multiple tagging on this.
>
> Also another question: the Registration VLAN, should PacketFence handle
> the routing? Because right now there is a Cisco 4500 in VSS that is doing
> the routing.
>
> What I’ve also noticed is that the second NIC it is not reachable from
> outside the subnet but honestly I think this should be how it works since
> it is supposed to be in an Isolated VLAN.
>
>
>
> Cannot wrap my head around what I’m missing/what I do wrong.
>
>
>
> Ivan
>
>
>
> *From:* Nicholas Pier [mailto:09np...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* domenica 9 giugno 2019 03:06
> *To:* packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> *Cc:* Ivan Saliu 
> *Subject:* Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal
> configuration
>
>
>
> Hi Ivan,
>
>
>
> I think this is mostly likely a configuration issue. It sounds like you
> may be expecting the controller to receive information about the captive
> portal. This may be possible, but it's not how I've deployed packetfence in
> the past. Instead, Radius and DNS do most of the work I've only worked with
> 7.x controller code and don't know what's changed since... however the
> typical workflow I've experienced is as follows:
>
>
>
>- User connects to SSID and is sent to registration VLAN if their node
>isn't pre-registered. If the node has been registered, the go immediately
>to the VLAN associated with their role and this flow stops.
>- If they're sent to the registation VLAN:
>
>
>- Packetfence provides DHCP and DNS for registration VLAN.
>   - DNS queries from the client are leveraged to redirect them to
>   packetfence for captive portal. Most modern browsers and OSs should do 
> this
>   automatically.
>   - If the us

Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal configuration

2019-06-10 Thread Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users
Hi Nicholas and Felipe (hopefully you stuck with us),

So now I’ve understood what I was doing wrong and it was just so stupid that I 
can’t even…

Basically I did two things:


-  I put the custom port for CoA (1700 on Cisco WLCs…why use 
standards…) on the field Disconnect Port (Policies and Access Control -> 
Network Devices -> Switches -> My WLC).
I found from the packetfence.log file that it was working only the 
authentication, but the VLAN switch was of course not working since it does a 
CoA de-authentication to move the VLAN.


-  Also the second step was also to put Advanced Access Configuration 
-> Captive Portal in the IP field the Registration interface IP otherwise it 
wouldn’t recognize in any case internet access.

Right now the captive portal is working fine, I do have some more things that 
worries me that I noticed from the packetfence.log file like the following 
error: Unable to extract SSID of Called-Station-ID, which if persist actually 
makes more difficult for me to distinguish between SSID and present a different 
captive portal for other users, but these are a lot less painful issues than 
the one that I’ve just solved.

Thanks again Nicholas for your support, as you said it was indeed a 
configuration issue,

Hope you all had a nice day,
Ivan

From: Ivan Saliu
Sent: lunedì 10 giugno 2019 15:47
To: packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: 'Nicholas Pier' <09np...@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal 
configuration

Hi Nicholas,

The issue is the second one you pointed out:

  *   If they disconnect and reconnect to the wireless, are they assigned the 
correct VLAN / IP ? This might mean that packetfence is properly associating 
the new role with the user, but the controller isn't getting dynamically 
updated.
They get the proper IP address….so the issue is when PacketFence needs to 
update the VLAN via Radius?

Still don’t get why the behavior is this one, I’ve checked and the 
Deauthentication Method is set as RADIUS, Use CoA is enabled, and I even put 
into the CoA port 1700 since Cisco’s WLC uses that.
The only thing that is missing is the Controller IP address field but I don’t 
think this should cause the issue.

Ivan

From: Nicholas Pier [mailto:09np...@gmail.com]
Sent: lunedì 10 giugno 2019 13:58
To: Ivan Saliu 
mailto:ivan.sa...@kikocosmetics.com>>
Cc: 
packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal 
configuration

Hi Ivan,

Let's start with what's supposed to happen immediately after a login:

Packetfence should reauthorize the user and send a message to the controller to 
change the role / vlan. This re-authroization is configured on both the 
controller and "switch" object in packetfence. Once this comes, the client 
needs to obtain a new IP address on the new subnet.

A few questions then:

  *   Does the client lose network access immediately after the 
re-authorization? This might indicate a client/controller-side issue if they're 
not getting a new dhcp lease quickly enough.
  *   If they disconnect and reconnect to the wireless, are they assigned the 
correct VLAN / IP ? This might mean that packetfence is properly associating 
the new role with the user, but the controller isn't getting dynamically 
updated.

My "gut" is that this isn't a problem with the way packetfence is deployed (I 
prefer multiple interfaces, even in VMware), but rather with the controller or 
"switch" configuration in packetfence. I'd work to verify that SNMP or Radius 
messages are being sent from packetfence to re-authroize the user and move them 
to the right VLAN. I think the preferred re-authorization is Radius or CoA 
since the network configuration guide doesn't mention SNMO read-write 
configuration. Can you look at the audit tab and verify that packetfence sends 
a radius message to the controller after login? Similarly, the "switch" config 
object should have Radius selected from the drop-down for re-authroization.

As for the switch, I think it's easiest to not give the switch an SVI IP (vlan 
interface) and let packetfence do the work. This way you don't need to worry 
about the routing implications of packetfence having multiple NICs with their 
own routes, and the ACLs that are required to isolate a client and only allow 
communication to packetfence. It's just easier. However, if you need to scale 
to a multi-site deployment and can't tag the registration VLAN end to end, a 
routed deployment may become necessary.

Best wishes,

Nicholas P. Pier
Network & Virtualization Engineer
CCNP RS, PCSNSE7, VCIX6-DCV, VCIX6-NV


On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 4:51 AM Ivan Saliu 
mailto:ivan.sa...@kikocosmetics.com>> wrote:
Hi Nicholas,

I do agree with you that the flow should be that one.
So far I’ve noticed that these points works perfec

Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal configuration

2019-06-10 Thread Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users
Hi Nicholas,

The issue is the second one you pointed out:

  *   If they disconnect and reconnect to the wireless, are they assigned the 
correct VLAN / IP ? This might mean that packetfence is properly associating 
the new role with the user, but the controller isn't getting dynamically 
updated.
They get the proper IP address….so the issue is when PacketFence needs to 
update the VLAN via Radius?

Still don’t get why the behavior is this one, I’ve checked and the 
Deauthentication Method is set as RADIUS, Use CoA is enabled, and I even put 
into the CoA port 1700 since Cisco’s WLC uses that.
The only thing that is missing is the Controller IP address field but I don’t 
think this should cause the issue.

Ivan

From: Nicholas Pier [mailto:09np...@gmail.com]
Sent: lunedì 10 giugno 2019 13:58
To: Ivan Saliu 
Cc: packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal 
configuration

Hi Ivan,

Let's start with what's supposed to happen immediately after a login:

Packetfence should reauthorize the user and send a message to the controller to 
change the role / vlan. This re-authroization is configured on both the 
controller and "switch" object in packetfence. Once this comes, the client 
needs to obtain a new IP address on the new subnet.

A few questions then:

  *   Does the client lose network access immediately after the 
re-authorization? This might indicate a client/controller-side issue if they're 
not getting a new dhcp lease quickly enough.
  *   If they disconnect and reconnect to the wireless, are they assigned the 
correct VLAN / IP ? This might mean that packetfence is properly associating 
the new role with the user, but the controller isn't getting dynamically 
updated.

My "gut" is that this isn't a problem with the way packetfence is deployed (I 
prefer multiple interfaces, even in VMware), but rather with the controller or 
"switch" configuration in packetfence. I'd work to verify that SNMP or Radius 
messages are being sent from packetfence to re-authroize the user and move them 
to the right VLAN. I think the preferred re-authorization is Radius or CoA 
since the network configuration guide doesn't mention SNMO read-write 
configuration. Can you look at the audit tab and verify that packetfence sends 
a radius message to the controller after login? Similarly, the "switch" config 
object should have Radius selected from the drop-down for re-authroization.

As for the switch, I think it's easiest to not give the switch an SVI IP (vlan 
interface) and let packetfence do the work. This way you don't need to worry 
about the routing implications of packetfence having multiple NICs with their 
own routes, and the ACLs that are required to isolate a client and only allow 
communication to packetfence. It's just easier. However, if you need to scale 
to a multi-site deployment and can't tag the registration VLAN end to end, a 
routed deployment may become necessary.

Best wishes,

Nicholas P. Pier
Network & Virtualization Engineer
CCNP RS, PCSNSE7, VCIX6-DCV, VCIX6-NV


On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 4:51 AM Ivan Saliu 
mailto:ivan.sa...@kikocosmetics.com>> wrote:
Hi Nicholas,

I do agree with you that the flow should be that one.
So far I’ve noticed that these points works perfectly:

  *   User connects to SSID and is sent to registration VLAN if their node 
isn't pre-registered. If the node has been registered, the go immediately to 
the VLAN associated with their role and this flow stops.
  *   If they're sent to the registation VLAN:

 *   Packetfence provides DHCP and DNS for registration VLAN.
 *   DNS queries from the client are leveraged to redirect them to 
packetfence for captive portal. Most modern browsers and OSs should do this 
automatically.

After these one though I get to the login page, I log in successfully but I get 
the error: Unable to detect network connectivity try restarting your web 
browser or opening a new tab to see if your access has been successfully 
enabled.
After this I’m stuck, the client is not redirected to the new VLAN and I keep 
the old IP Address.

PacketFence is deployed in the following way:

2 NICs, one NIC operates as a Management interface with Radius and DHCP Daemons 
listening here. The 2nd NIC operates as a Registration Interface, does DNS and 
DHCP.

This is deployed in Hyper-V so this is a forced mode, I cannot use a single 
interface and build on top VLANs since Hyper-V doesn’t support multiple tagging 
on this.
Also another question: the Registration VLAN, should PacketFence handle the 
routing? Because right now there is a Cisco 4500 in VSS that is doing the 
routing.
What I’ve also noticed is that the second NIC it is not reachable from outside 
the subnet but honestly I think this should be how it works since it is 
supposed to be in an Isolated VLAN.

Cannot wrap my head around what I’m missing/what I do wrong.

Ivan

From: N

Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal configuration

2019-06-10 Thread Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users
Hi Nicholas,

I do agree with you that the flow should be that one.
So far I’ve noticed that these points works perfectly:

  *   User connects to SSID and is sent to registration VLAN if their node 
isn't pre-registered. If the node has been registered, the go immediately to 
the VLAN associated with their role and this flow stops.
  *   If they're sent to the registation VLAN:
 *   Packetfence provides DHCP and DNS for registration VLAN.
 *   DNS queries from the client are leveraged to redirect them to 
packetfence for captive portal. Most modern browsers and OSs should do this 
automatically.

After these one though I get to the login page, I log in successfully but I get 
the error: Unable to detect network connectivity try restarting your web 
browser or opening a new tab to see if your access has been successfully 
enabled.
After this I’m stuck, the client is not redirected to the new VLAN and I keep 
the old IP Address.

PacketFence is deployed in the following way:

2 NICs, one NIC operates as a Management interface with Radius and DHCP Daemons 
listening here. The 2nd NIC operates as a Registration Interface, does DNS and 
DHCP.

This is deployed in Hyper-V so this is a forced mode, I cannot use a single 
interface and build on top VLANs since Hyper-V doesn’t support multiple tagging 
on this.
Also another question: the Registration VLAN, should PacketFence handle the 
routing? Because right now there is a Cisco 4500 in VSS that is doing the 
routing.
What I’ve also noticed is that the second NIC it is not reachable from outside 
the subnet but honestly I think this should be how it works since it is 
supposed to be in an Isolated VLAN.

Cannot wrap my head around what I’m missing/what I do wrong.

Ivan

From: Nicholas Pier [mailto:09np...@gmail.com]
Sent: domenica 9 giugno 2019 03:06
To: packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: Ivan Saliu 
Subject: Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal 
configuration

Hi Ivan,

I think this is mostly likely a configuration issue. It sounds like you may be 
expecting the controller to receive information about the captive portal. This 
may be possible, but it's not how I've deployed packetfence in the past. 
Instead, Radius and DNS do most of the work I've only worked with 7.x 
controller code and don't know what's changed since... however the typical 
workflow I've experienced is as follows:


  *   User connects to SSID and is sent to registration VLAN if their node 
isn't pre-registered. If the node has been registered, the go immediately to 
the VLAN associated with their role and this flow stops.
  *   If they're sent to the registation VLAN:

 *   Packetfence provides DHCP and DNS for registration VLAN.
 *   DNS queries from the client are leveraged to redirect them to 
packetfence for captive portal. Most modern browsers and OSs should do this 
automatically.
 *   If the user successfully authenticates, packetfence sends a radius 
message back to the controller to change their VLAN and place them on a 
different subnet.
 *   Client obtains a new lease and can access the network.

I don't know much about your setup, but if its not routed, and clients are 
placed on the same vlan as packetfence (not a routed deployment). Are you 
leveraging packetfence for DHCP and DNS on the registration VLAN?

Best wishes,

Nicholas P. Pier
Network & Virtualization Engineer
CCNP RS, PCSNSE7, VCIX6-DCV, VCIX6-NV


On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 7:45 PM Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users 
mailto:packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net>>
 wrote:
Hello Guys,

I’m experiencing a lot of issues in configuring PacketFence’s Captive Portal 
(Version 9.0.1) with Cisco’s WLC (5508, software version 8.1).
Basically I’ve tried to deploy the solution in two ways:


-  The “Network Guide” one, where there is only 1 VLAN with ACLs on the 
WLC to permit only traffic to DHCP/DNS servers and PacketFence Portal. The 
issue here is the fact that the redirection does not work at all. The Radius 
parameter with the URL redirection is not filled with data and so the WLC 
doesn’t redirect at all the traffic. This is an issue because I do not like the 
user experience, since being force to type an URL to log in and register the 
device is not good.

-  The second type of deployment I’ve tried to do is an interface in 
Registration mode, on a dedicated VLAN managed entirely by PacketFence, trying 
to use the VLAN change to grant internet access. In this case the Captive 
Portal works fine, but once I log into it is not recognized internet access and 
I get an error saying that internet access cannot be validated. If I try to 
disconnect the client and reconnect it, the VLAN is changed properly and 
everything works fine, but again this is not a good user experience and I 
cannot put in a production environment something that doesn’t work properly. 
This would also be my preferred solution since it grants the best approach to

Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal configuration

2019-06-08 Thread Nicholas Pier via PacketFence-users
Hi Ivan,

I think this is mostly likely a configuration issue. It sounds like you may
be expecting the controller to receive information about the captive
portal. This may be possible, but it's not how I've deployed packetfence in
the past. Instead, Radius and DNS do most of the work I've only worked with
7.x controller code and don't know what's changed since... however the
typical workflow I've experienced is as follows:


   - User connects to SSID and is sent to registration VLAN if their node
   isn't pre-registered. If the node has been registered, the go immediately
   to the VLAN associated with their role and this flow stops.
   - If they're sent to the registation VLAN:
  - Packetfence provides DHCP and DNS for registration VLAN.
  - DNS queries from the client are leveraged to redirect them to
  packetfence for captive portal. Most modern browsers and OSs
should do this
  automatically.
  - If the user successfully authenticates, packetfence sends a radius
  message back to the controller to change their VLAN and place them on a
  different subnet.
  - Client obtains a new lease and can access the network.


I don't know much about your setup, but if its not routed, and clients are
placed on the same vlan as packetfence (not a routed deployment). Are you
leveraging packetfence for DHCP and DNS on the registration VLAN?

Best wishes,

*Nicholas P. Pier*
Network & Virtualization Engineer
*CCNP RS, PCSNSE7, VCIX6-DCV, VCIX6-NV*


On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 7:45 PM Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users <
packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> Hello Guys,
>
>
>
> I’m experiencing a lot of issues in configuring PacketFence’s Captive
> Portal (Version 9.0.1) with Cisco’s WLC (5508, software version 8.1).
>
> Basically I’ve tried to deploy the solution in two ways:
>
>
>
> -  The “Network Guide” one, where there is only 1 VLAN with ACLs
> on the WLC to permit only traffic to DHCP/DNS servers and PacketFence
> Portal. The issue here is the fact that the redirection does not work at
> all. The Radius parameter with the URL redirection is not filled with data
> and so the WLC doesn’t redirect at all the traffic. This is an issue
> because I do not like the user experience, since being force to type an URL
> to log in and register the device is not good.
>
> -  The second type of deployment I’ve tried to do is an interface
> in Registration mode, on a dedicated VLAN managed entirely by PacketFence,
> trying to use the VLAN change to grant internet access. In this case the
> Captive Portal works fine, but once I log into it is not recognized
> internet access and I get an error saying that internet access cannot be
> validated. If I try to disconnect the client and reconnect it, the VLAN is
> changed properly and everything works fine, but again this is not a good
> user experience and I cannot put in a production environment something that
> doesn’t work properly. This would also be my preferred solution since it
> grants the best approach to security of course since I would be able to
> isolate the Registration VLAN and then with Access-List prohibit access to
> corporate network once the client in registered.
>
>
>
> Do you have any idea on how to solve these issues? I do think it is most
> likely a misconfiguration on PacketFence or maybe I’m trying to implement
> something that it is not supported by Cisco with its WLC?!
>
>
>
> Any help on this would be greatly appreciated,
>
> Ivan
> ___
> PacketFence-users mailing list
> PacketFence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users
>
___
PacketFence-users mailing list
PacketFence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users


Re: [PacketFence-users] Issues with PacketFence Captive Portal configuration

2019-06-08 Thread Ivan Saliu via PacketFence-users
Hello Guys,

I'm experiencing a lot of issues in configuring PacketFence's Captive Portal 
(Version 9.0.1) with Cisco's WLC (5508, software version 8.1).
Basically I've tried to deploy the solution in two ways:


-  The "Network Guide" one, where there is only 1 VLAN with ACLs on the 
WLC to permit only traffic to DHCP/DNS servers and PacketFence Portal. The 
issue here is the fact that the redirection does not work at all. The Radius 
parameter with the URL redirection is not filled with data and so the WLC 
doesn't redirect at all the traffic. This is an issue because I do not like the 
user experience, since being force to type an URL to log in and register the 
device is not good.

-  The second type of deployment I've tried to do is an interface in 
Registration mode, on a dedicated VLAN managed entirely by PacketFence, trying 
to use the VLAN change to grant internet access. In this case the Captive 
Portal works fine, but once I log into it is not recognized internet access and 
I get an error saying that internet access cannot be validated. If I try to 
disconnect the client and reconnect it, the VLAN is changed properly and 
everything works fine, but again this is not a good user experience and I 
cannot put in a production environment something that doesn't work properly. 
This would also be my preferred solution since it grants the best approach to 
security of course since I would be able to isolate the Registration VLAN and 
then with Access-List prohibit access to corporate network once the client in 
registered.

Do you have any idea on how to solve these issues? I do think it is most likely 
a misconfiguration on PacketFence or maybe I'm trying to implement something 
that it is not supported by Cisco with its WLC?!

Any help on this would be greatly appreciated,
Ivan
___
PacketFence-users mailing list
PacketFence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users