XCP-NG remote wont find TrueNAS

Im trying to connect my XCP-NG pool to backup to a remote TrueNAS system. In XCP-NG, I have configured all of the servers to use eth2 as the storage network and is connected to a 10gig sfp Mircotik switch. Eth0 is for the internet, eth2 is for the storage network.

Im using DHCP and get IP addresses for all 3 servers in the XCP-NG pool and can ping everyone on the subnet (truenas and hosts). But for some reason I cannot for the life of me get XCP-NG to connect to the TrueNAS NFS share.

NFS is running
User is setup to have all read/write permissions
All dirs is checked in NFS settings
Enabled is checked
Maproot User and Maproot Group are set to proper user and group
Authorized network is set to the subnet
Static IP set to

All hosts are getting DHCP IP addresses on eth2 (, 253, 252)
location is /mnt/ZFSPool/XCPNGBackup

I have no clue why it doesnt want to connect. I have a feeling I’m missing something really simple but I sure cant find anything. I have been playing around and reading for the last couple hours. Anyone have some pointers?

Make sure dataset permissions are set to generic and fully open with all boxes checked for user/group/other, and leave Mapped User and Mapped Group blank.

Thanks Tom. I think I got it all correct. I can add a SR with that same server and directory, but it wont connect as a remote for some reason.

Just read this thread: Issues Mounting NFS Remote for Backups | XCP-ng and XO forum

This seems to be the same problem. So, if I understand this correctly, since my XO is running on but the storage network is on, I need to setup permissions in TrueNAS to accept the as well as as authorized networks. Does that seem correct?

With NFS it’s a much better design to have them on the same subnet. I do this by having a dedicated storage network and my XO instance has 2 interfaces, one in the management and the other in the storage network.

Thanks again Tom. I’ll try and move the sfp switch over to the same network and see what happens. I dunno why I though running a completely separate subnet was a better idea than just setting a vlan on the same subnet