I think you have problem with nating.  When youupgrade from r55 to r6x in 
global properties > NAT translate destination on client side is un ticked.  If 
you do a fresh insatll this is defualt behavior of R6x. You can manually check 
this box and it should work. if not could you please enable NAT logging in 
tracker and upload the logs again
regards
t


-----Original Message-----
From: Crist Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 7:03 pm
Subject: [FW-1] Log and fw monitor Do Not Agree



Last night, we swapped out an old Solaris box running NG-R55
or a new(er) SecurePlatform system running R65 HFA_02. It went
retty smoothly, except for one weird problem. A VPN connection
hat passed through the firewall stopped working. This was
orking fine up until the swap. The rule set was not changed.
he only change to the policy for the swap were to the firewall
odule itself, a SIC reset, change interface names, and new
ersion and OS. The VPN is the only problem we've noticed.
The two endpoints of the VPN are Cisco routers. Each is behind
 different Check Point firewall with the Internet in between.
he catch is that we are NATing one end. That's where the new
irewall is and that seems to be what is broken. The firewall
s logging as if it is doing NAT,
Number:                                 6910875
ate:                                       17Apr2008
ime:                                       9:35:05
roduct:                                    VPN-1 Power/UTM
nterface:                                  eth1
rigin:                                     10.160.251.6
ype:                                       Log
ction:                                     Accept
ervice:                                    IKE (500)
ource:                                     msga-vpn-loop
10.160.39.148)
estination:                            EDH-VPN (aaa.bbb.103.193)
rotocol:                                   udp
ule:                                       21
urrent Rule Number:            21-canada-internet
AT rule number:                    7
AT additional rule number: 0
ource Port:                            ISAKMP (500)
lateSrc:                                   MSG-VPN
ccc.ddd.86.243)
nformation:                            service_id: IKE
ule UID:                             
   {1AE13B3D-BFF3-4C77-A225-17EC985D33F5}
martDefense Profile:           Default_Protection
olicy Info:                            Policy Name:
anada-internet
                                               Created at: Thu Apr 17
9:29:46 2008
                                               Installed from: fwmgr
But when I run "fw monitor" on the firewall,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# fw monitor -e 'accept sport=500;'
monitor: getting filter (from command line)
monitor: compiling
onitorfilter:
ompiled OK.
monitor: loading
monitor: monitoring (control-C to stop)
th1:i[280]: 10.160.39.148 -> aaa.bbb.103.193 (UDP) len=280 id=63313
DP: 500 -> 500
th1:I[280]: 10.160.39.148 -> aaa.bbb.103.193 (UDP) len=280 id=63313
DP: 500 -> 500
th0:o[280]: 10.160.39.148 -> aaa.bbb.103.193 (UDP) len=280 id=63313
DP: 500 -> 500
th0:O[280]: 10.160.39.148 -> aaa.bbb.103.193 (UDP) len=280 id=63313
DP: 500 -> 500
th1:i[280]: 10.160.39.148 -> aaa.bbb.103.193 (UDP) len=280 id=63327
DP: 500 -> 500
th1:I[280]: 10.160.39.148 -> aaa.bbb.103.193 (UDP) len=280 id=63327
DP: 500 -> 500
th0:o[280]: 10.160.39.148 -> aaa.bbb.103.193 (UDP) len=280 id=63327
DP: 500 -> 500
th0:O[280]: 10.160.39.148 -> aaa.bbb.103.193 (UDP) len=280 id=63327
DP: 500 -> 500
It does not look like it is doing NAT. So which do I trust? The
fw monitor" or the log? They disagree. The fact that I never
ee anything arrive at the other end makes me think it really
s not doing NAT and some ISP in between is filtering RFC1918
ource addresses. I don't have another box on that link to
o a convenient sniff and running tcpdump on a SPlat box gives
unky results when doing NAT, so it isn't any help.
I've tried re-installing policy. No help. I don't see how tweaking
he policy and re-installing would help if the logs seem to
ndicate the firewall is actually hitting the rules as intended.
I tried doing a "fw sam -I src 10.160.39.148" then after a
inute canceling it in order to clear any existing entry for
he connection from any state tables, but no change (the log
ntry above is actually the one that popped up right after
 cleared the SAM rule).
What changed between R55 and R65? This a bug? How do I get
his VPN back up (short of reconfiguring the end points and
aving to add a whole bunch of routing to the network to
ork it without NAT)?
B¼information contained in this e-mail message is confidential, intended
nly for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader
f this e-mail is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent
esponsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
otified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this
ommunication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail
n error, please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.
=================================================
o set vacation, Out-Of-Office, or away messages,
end an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
n the BODY of the email add:
et fw-1-mailinglist nomail
================================================
o unsubscribe from this mailing list,
lease see the instructions at
ttp://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
================================================
f you have any questions on how to change your
ubscription options, email
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
================================================




Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.


=================================================
To set vacation, Out-Of-Office, or away messages,
send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
in the BODY of the email add:
set fw-1-mailinglist nomail
=================================================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
please see the instructions at
http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
=================================================
If you have any questions on how to change your
subscription options, email
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=================================================

Reply via email to