Hello,
I have an old RB751G-2HnD which I recently updated from version 6 to 7.9 as I needed Wireguard. The configuration is very basic. No firewall rules, no special routes. Just the minimum required configs to connect to the internet and connect with wireguard to the VPN provider of my choice (Mullvad). I have an identical RB5009 setup which works great. In the case of RB751G-2HnD, I see no attempt to connect to the Mullvad endpoints.
I get 0 TX bytes in the peer tab.
I found it weird. I then setup a new Wireguard endpoint to my RB5009 and tried to connect to that one from my RB751G-2HnD. Again, no movement or an attempt to initiate any connection and TX bytes were 0. In both cases I could ping the endpoints just fine from the RB751G-2HnD, so this does not like a connectivity issue. The RB5009 endpoint was working fine as I tested it with my phone wireguard client later on.
It’s as if the Wireguard service is dead for this device.
Anyone noticed anything similar? I understand that RB751G-2HnD is an ancient device, but I still have uses for it.
(1) Being a client for connecting you are missing the persistent-keep-alive setting for say 35s on the wireguard peer settings.
(2) There is no reason not to post the /ip address —> the mulvad IP address, your not helping sort your issues, as the problem may lie here. in any case just make sure the address you put is X/24 and the network entry is X.X.X.0
(3) I dont believe you that your setup is the same as the 5009. If your 5009 is setup the same way it would not work either.
YOu tell me
a. how your users are getting to the wireguard tunnel??? There is no path…
b. how are your users using mulvad with their LANIP addresses…
Why dont you post your working 5009 and I can point out the differences that you are missing
I appreciate you take the time to help me but you need to chill with that attitude.
After I enabled persistent-keep-alive it established the connection just fine. I never touched this config before in any of my setups, but all good now.
But again, please work on this attitude. We’re all grown ups here (I hope).
Sorry when you hide facts and ask for help, you are the one with attitude problem.
If I missed something, then my bad but here is what I see (or dont see)
There is no route, no mangling, no routing rule, no indication of how users on your subnet get to the wireguard…
There is no sourcenat rule for all LAN users to get assigned the mulvad assigned IP when leaving the router towards mullvad.