I have hAP ax3 configured with a WireGuard tunnel.
The connection is ok, but I've a problem to access Winbox when the tunnel is active.
I can be able to reache every device in the LAN, but not the MT (also via Webfig).
If you could edit the export in your post into a single code/peformatted block it would be easier to read. Put 3 back ticks ``` on an empty line, then the export, and then three more back ticks on a line after.
In the meanwhile, it doesn't look like your wireguard interface is in the LAN interface list. So peer traffic isn't hitting the firewall input chain allow rules to access the router. Try:
/interface list member
interface=wireguard list=LAN
Alternately you could set up an input chain rules just for one peer by IP address if you want to limit access.
There is still something not working in your formatting. When I type 3 back ticks I get a code block. Your formatting is still not as code, so it’s better since it’s consistent, but still not right. Try editing the post, delete the back ticks, select the whole export then click the preformatted text format button </>
I think I misunderstood your network. Thought you were on a wg peer while trying to access the router. You’re on a local LAN device, yeah?
Why two duplicate pools?
/ip pool
add name=dhcp-pool ranges=192.168.2.0/24
add comment=vpn-pool name=vpn-pool ranges=192.168.2.0/24
Please refrain from using the same name for different interfaces or parameters in RoS, its confusing to the reader and also may cause unknown issues.
Recommend the following:
You see 2 pools because I made a test with a second pool linked to the wg interface and I forgot to remove it;
ok. I changed in use-WG;
no, the denomination TIM is present. When i removed all my personal details/comments, I forgot to remove TIM from the txt;
yes, I have a Kaspersky VPN. Also here, I forgot to mention it in the intro. Sorry. Kaspersky suggest me to set persistent-keep-alive=10s; I don't know if a 30s change would cause problems;
done;
yes, I use the DNS provided from Kaspersky;
yeah. No problem with the NAT;
no, I need this route because if I remove it, I can’t access to the ISP modem on 192.168.1.1 from the network 192.168.2.0/24 (I need to check the VDSL and VoIP status)
same as 8.
yes and with your suggestions now I can access to the MT from Winbox and browser, and I can be able to ping the router!