Hi All. I am building out a new router to replace my old one. This is not in production yet.
Firmware Version OpenWrt 23.05.2 r23630-842932a63d / LuCI 7739e9f5b03b830f51d53c384be4baef95054cb3 branch git-23.334.55645-2026e51
I have 3 interfaces to use on my router.
1 is for WAN
1 is for everything but iot hosts
1 is for iot hosts only
I have several VLANs set up (possibly incorrectly)
VLAN
3 - iot
4 - dmz
5 - internet restricted (cameras/TVs/things that don't need to access the internet)
7 - guest
9 - nailed up vpn
10 - lan
I also have several interfaces set up
iot - br-iot.3
dmz - br-lan.4
spy (internet restricted for cameras/TVs) - br-lan.5
guest - br-lan.7
vpn - br-lan.9
lan - br-lan.10
Just because they're based on a common bridge doesn't immediately mean that they are able to communicate with each other. But we need to see te details of the config to be able to advise further:
Please connect to your OpenWrt device using ssh and copy the output of the following commands and post it here using the "Preformatted text </> " button:
Remember to redact passwords, MAC addresses and any public IP addresses you may have:
ubus call system board
cat /etc/config/network
cat /etc/config/firewall
Meanwhile, it is the firewall that is responsible for the isolation beyond that... and it looks like all networks are able to reach the router itself (this may or may not be something you want to restrict).
In the restricted zone, cameras and spy can connect to each other because of the zone forward rule (ACCEPT).
Then because of the following bidirectional ruleset, lan can reach restricted and vice versa.
The next section is not necessary since (and as long as) there isn't a forwarding rule that allows restricted > wan.
There are a lot of networks and zones, and so it's hard to know exactly what you want to happen from an allow/deny perspective... if you can elaborate on that, we can help you make sure it'll perform as you desire.
Here's what I want to do:
Have these VLANs trunked on eth1:
VLAN
3 - iot
4 - dmz
5 - internet restricted (cameras/TVs/things that don't need to access the internet)
7 - guest
9 - nailed up vpn
10 - lan
VLANs 3, 4, 7, 9, 10 will have internet access
VLAN 5 does not have internet access
VLANs 5 and 10 can communicate with one another (bidirectional traffic initiation)
Other VLANs to not have the ability to communicate with other VLANs.
Only VLAN 10 should have access to the router (this is something I did not know how to restrict in the fw)
I think I understand. I can drop the bridge interfaces and just create eth1. interfaces. Is that correct?
I assume this is x86 or Pi hardware with direct CPU ports, so there is no DFS switch.
In that case you can create VLANs directly on the CPU ports with the ethX.N notation. These tagged ports can be either in bridges or directly as the option device of an interface block, if there is only to be the one port in that network. So for the future you may want to build the whole config out on the structure of a separate bridge for each network, even if right now that bridge only has one member.
Attempting to use tagged and untagged on the same port generally does not work with direct ports. In theory, untagged packets will be sent to ethX (with no VLAN). So there really isn't an implementation of "native VLAN". On a trunk port such as your eth1, a plain eth1 should not appear anywhere in the configuration--have only eth1 with a VLAN number. That will cause any stray incoming untagged packets or packets with a tag number that is not defined, to be dropped.