This topic has been locked by an administrator and is no longer open for commenting. (I say get to v5, because otherwise that will be the first thing they say). In addition, the configuration directs any outgoing . If no routes are found in the routing table, then the policy route does not match the packet. im quite confuse how will it work. Policy Based Routing does not work as expected, fortigate 5.2.11. To enable the feature, go to System, and then to Feature Visiblity. When I remove the Static Route, it does no longer match (as expected). 07:01 AM. After processing is finished FortiGate forwards the packet towards its destination. A client request destined for the virtual server 2.2.2.2 arrives from the client with the IP address 4.4.4.4. I need to replace that static route with a policy route, however, due to a conflicting IP range. I am uncertain on how exactly to set up the Policy Route, since I think it is actually "return" traffic that would not be able to find its way back to the originating source-IP?I currently have: Incoming Interface: The interface containing IP 172.16.50.10 and 172.31.16.10, Source Address: 172.16.50.0/24 and 172.31.160.0/24 (also tried "all" ), Forward Traffic to Outgoing interface $name_of_ipsec_interface. For example, a FortiWeb has a default static route that forwards traffic for any destination to 1.1.1.254, which is the gateway for ISP1. I've had a little play about with NAT and PBR in my lab and am currently struggling to get what appears to be a fully working solution. Policy based routing & SD-WAN policy based routing. That part works perfectly when communication is initiated from local site. ;) (Compared to my other PBR/PBF tutorials from Juniper ScreenOS and Palo . How to configure policy-based routing in the Fortigate firewallPBR explained with a scenario FortiWeb's Static Routes configuration directs outgoing traffic based on packet destination. 03:36 AM, Created on Configuring Policy-based Routing on Fortigate Login t o Fort igat e under an administ rat ive account Click Router on t he lef t side menu, select Policy Routing On t he t op of t he right pane, click Create New . Is this a bug or I lack some configuration? IP => stop policy processing. So if remote site (2.2.2.2) starts pinging (1.1.1.1) which is the SD-WAN box Public IP, we need NAT rules to translate the destination address to the range (172.14.198.x) which is the local subnet between SD-WAN box and FG firewall. For example, a FortiWeb has a default static route that forwards traffic for any destination to 1.1.1.254, which is the gateway for ISP1. next 10-15-2017 You are trying to accomplish Scenario 5 I believe. 01:01 AM. The problem is that this works only when the traffic is initiated from the local site where my firewall is. Whenever I do anything on this machine, all the traffic still uses wan1. That part works without any problem. Policy Routing on a FortiGate Firewall. The system evaluates policy routes, then static routes. 40.0 -> 10.0 via VPN(fortigate ip is 192.168.10.254) . Bonus Flashback: Back on December 9, 2006, the first-ever Swedish astronaut launched to We have some documents stored on our SharePoint site and we have 1 user that when she clicks on an Excel file, it automatically downloads to her Downloads folder. Computers can ping it but cannot connect to it. The pool members reply contains the destination provided by FortiWeb (4.4.4.4) but not the interface associated with the request. i am stuck in the same problem, i have 3 IPs links , i have created 3 default routers to each ISP connections. If anyone needs to know the firmware versions on my test firewall its V4 MR3 patch 10 (its just a noddy 50B) and for our production appliances (if it ever gets that far) its V5 GA Patch 4. e.g SMTP to a mail relay or SNMP to a monitoring network. My vote goes to this being potentially the issue. In 6.2, this is added, and new options are available in the GUI to support further testing scenarios. Will post back here if I get any results! Help shape the future of Fortinet! . Mar 21st, 2014 at 6:56 AM check Best Answer. In. set input-device "port1" That part works without any problem. set input-device "port1" Does that mean that I can get rid of the "services" interface on the Fortigate and add the 172.16.50.1/24 IP on the actual IPsec tunnel interface? The distance must be the same so that both routes are installed in the routing table, but the priority can be set lower on the wan1 circuit so that traffic only hits that unless it hits your policy route. - wan1 & wan2 are 2 different ISPs on DHCP, and are bundled into SD-WAN- sd-wan serves traffic to home via port 19/20 on a LACP bond. Example shown in this slide is default static route which means all subnet (0.0.0.0/0) traffic will go via port 1 by using gateway 10.0.3.1 if no matches found in the . I have FGT300D running firmware 5.2.11. 09-12-2020 I've been a bit of a lurker here on spiceworks for some time but now have a question that I cannot find an answer to on the notorious interweb ;). Because all incoming traffic for virtual server 2.2.2.2 arrives on the IP2 gateway 2.2.2.254, you configure FortiWeb to route all replies from 2.2.2.2 to that gateway. The Fortinet Security Fabric brings together the concepts of convergence and consolidation to provide comprehensive cybersecurity protection for all users, devices, and applications and across all network edges.. Traffic from VLAN 1 to VLAN 2 routes via VLAN 3 as gateway and appears to originate from VLAN 3, the ultimate goal here is for client connections from VLAN 1 to all appear to come from VLAN 3 and consume existing policy rules from VLAN3 to VLAN 2 and indeed many other DMZ's withou the need to add many many rules between VLAN1 and all other DMZ's. set src "172.14.192.0/255.255.252.0" Policy-based routing initially did not seem to work. Review this document for detailed explanations of different scenarios. You are trying to accomplish Scenario 5 I believe. Due to order of processing on the device it will always route traffic between 2 directly connected interfaces/VLAN using the policy rules between them. Your daily dose of tech news, in brief. I'm trying to get policy routing working in which case traffic from one device will always use a specific wan circuit while all other traffic uses the other wan circuit but it doesn't seem to work. In addition I have couple of PBR rules that route traffic sourcing from specific subnet to another specific route to an interface. Do you know how to make this scenario working with Fortigate? Or it does not until I initiate ping from local to remote host. However, the appliance also has a virtual server with the address 2.2.2.2 that . 10:45 PM. I would update the lab firewall to v5 and then call support with the scenario. I often find that I can Google up info better than what they have on hand. Static Route: Manually configured route, when you are configuring static route, you are telling Firewall to see the packet for specific destination range and specific interface. Routing is static only. That is rather not problematic. Only one single configuration page and you're done. I have FGT300D running firmware 5.2.11. The return traffic will not be checked against the policy route. did you try a specific PBR route for your Netscaler ? 01:32 PM. Yes, 1st / 2nd line support is frustrating! The packets are routed to the first route that matches. It's an outer/perimeter FW installation, one Internet breakout, couple of interface based IPSec VPN terminated. some FAP 210B/221C/223C/321C/421E, Created on FortiGate Firewall Policy . In my opinion I can see that Outbound Ping is working because the SD-WAN box is configured properly to handle Outbound Many-to-One NAT (or what is known as PAT). If that NAT is configured properly then it should have a corresponding VIP configured on FG to further translate the incoming traffic to other local subnets/hosts, with suitable inbound firewall policies to allow this traffic. set gateway 172.14.198.2 This version adds policy route look up support and prioritizes it over static/dynamic (normal) routes when doing route lookup . I would appreciate any feedback on this before I waste too much time trying to proof of concept this capability. Created on why do so many support desks operate this way. we can websearch for things just as well as they can ! Is it possible to create rules with features like NAT/PAT and policy based routing (PBR) to achieve the following. edit 11 Policy based routing is not applicable and only works where traffic matching particular criteria needs to go via a specific gateway or server outside of the appliance. I did not do that before because I did not see the option for Additional IPs on the IPsec interfaces. edit 10 This topic focuses on FortiGate with a route-based VPN configuration. Routing is static only. Copyright 2022 Fortinet, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Created on Destination IP address in returning traffic is known to firewall and finds its way back to initial source. However, we need to check the SD-WAN box for Inbound NAT. The solution was a /32 static route for just the remote firewall's IP, still using the tunnel device (seems weird/wrong), and then a broader policy-based route sending . That traffic is sent to a NetScaler SD-WAN box which is deployed virtually inline. Hi everybody and created 2 policy routers 1st one PBR for ISP1 for VPN traffic and 2nd one PBR for Certain Vlans users and working but 3rd PBR one single vlan is not working. I'm pretty new to using Policy Based Routes as we've previously always used static routes.However now we have an IPsec tunnel where the remote network overlaps with another network for which we already have static routes configured. Not sure I understood what you meant with NetScaler sending packets to itself and how that could help firewall to do its job? FortiGate looks for matching firewall policies from top to bottom and if the match is found the traffic is processed based on the firewall policy, if no match is found the traffic is dropped by the Default Implicit Deny firewall policy. So private IP addresses going outbound via the SD-WAN will have the SRC address translated to 1.1.1.1 (if my understanding of the setup is correct). 09-12-2020 set dst "172.60.80.0/255.255.255.0" 10-25-2017 end, Remote subnets are 172.60.80.0/24 and 172.60.99.0/24, Local NetScaler SD-WAN sits on its own subnet 172.14.198.0/24 with IP address .2, Local interface on firewall connected to internal core switch, port1. The following Policy Route settings fix this asymmetric routing issue by directing outgoing traffic based on the source IP. . 11:03 AM. Created on 10-23-2017 Returning traffic is getting back to SD-WAN box the same way, after being decapsulated its sent back to firewall. This is a small example on how to configure policy routes (also known as policy-based forwarding or policy-based routing) on a Fortinet firewall, which is really simple at all. So I would first investigate this Inbound NAT configuration on the SD-WAN box as most likely this is the place of fault. 10-19-2017 A community for Fortinet users to help each other with products, share best practices and to share feedback directly with the R&D team. However, I can not find the way to instruct the Fortigate to work in a similar manner. Policy-based routing can correct this problem by ensuring that replies to clients use the same interface as the original request. Well it turns out that the scenario I was postulating cannot be provided by a Fortinet appliance. If I start pinging from a remote site it doesnt go through, but if I start ping from local site at the same time, then suddenly, remote ping starts to get replies! Does anyone have an idea of how to set up these policy routes. Hi everybody PBR on my Fortgate is not working as expected but rather kind of odd. If one or both of these are not specified in the policy route, then the FortiGate searches the routing table to find the best active route that corresponds to the policy route. In addition, the configuration directs any outgoing traffic from the virtual server with an IP address 1.1.1.1 (which receives traffic over the default gateway) to the default gateway: Fixing asymmetric routing problems with policy-based routing. https://kb.fortinet.com/k.do?externalId=FD32103, The Fortinet Security Fabric brings together the concepts of convergence and consolidation to provide comprehensive cybersecurity protection for all users, devices, and applications and across all network edges.. I think my favorite is #5, blocking the mouse sensor - I also like the idea of adding a little picture or note, and it's short and sweet. Please could you explain it a bit more? By default, FortiGate provisions the IPSec tunnel in route-based mode. The policy route table, therefore, need not include a "default route" for packets that do not match your policy because those packets can be forwarded to the default route set in the static route table. The debug flow will show it if RPF is dropping the traffic. 03:24 AM, The cli cmd diag debug flow is your best friend in this issue, 2: I would review the output especially any lines that says routes or policy or lookup, Created on The distance must be the same so that both routes are installed in the routing table, but the priority can be set lower on the wan1 circuit so that traffic only hits that unless it hits your policy route. If you don't have a static or dynamic(rip,ospf or bgp) route in the routing table for172.60.80.0/24 &172.60.99.0/24 then the traffic originating from the remote site might be getting dropped because of the anti-spoofing. When such packet comes to firewall it goes out normally following the default route in routing table. Review this document for detailed explanations of different scenarios. The Forums are a place to find answers on a range of Fortinet products from peers and product experts. However, the appliance also has a virtual server with the address 2.2.2.2 that receives traffic from the ISP2 gateway, which has an IP address of 2.2.2.254. I have a Fortigate 50E (6.0.8) with 2 WAN connections (both DSL unfortunately from the same ISP), I have both connected and PPPoE set on both - both up appearing as connected networks (ppp1 and ppp2) in the routing table, I have 2 static default routes, circuit A (wan1) with distance and priority 10 and circuit B (wan2) with 20, I have a policy route which says incoming interface LAN, source IP of my test PC, destination any, forward traffic out wan2 (circuit B), I have a policy which allows all traffic from this this test PC on the lan to go to the internet using wan2 (this policy is ahead of the policy which allows general lan traffic to the internet through wan1)[/ul]. Basically traffic sent by PBR rules is being encapsulated (gets new DST IP, SRC IP is now SD-WAN) and sent it back to same the interface of firewall, but then due to new source and destination IP in new IP header, it simply follows the routing table. VPN and i place my fortigate on 10.0 planning to route 40.0 to 70.0 using the internet. The following Policy Route settings fix this asymmetric routing issue by directing outgoing traffic based on the source IP. Well it turns out that the scenario I was postulating cannot be provided by a Fortinet appliance. Its like the appliance simply saying "why would you even want to go via that interface when the destination is right here" Its by design and cannot be circumvented. I came across this thread (which is little old) however I thought to add this comment in case it will help anyone reading the thread. Created on Any user ccessing internet from LAN will first check policy based routing if ip matches packet will be send to policy of secondary link as per policy if traffic is 80 and 443 is allowed nd . Copyright 2022 Fortinet, Inc. All Rights Reserved. We have a Fortigate 100F on 6.2.3 with the following configuration: We have a Virtual IP (NAT) on the Fortigate to route 172.16.50.10 -> 172.31.160.10. 10-14-2017 If auxiliary session is enabled, the traffic will egress from an interface based on the . Scenario is 2 DMZ/VLAN on the same physical interface. The FortiGate continues down the policy route list until it reaches the end. Because all incoming traffic for virtual server 2.2.2.2 arrives on the IP2 gateway 2.2.2.254, you configure FortiWeb to route all replies from 2.2.2.2 to that gateway. set gateway 172.14.198.2 As of FortiOS 5.x, our policy-based routing supports matching the following attributes to determine which output-device to use when starting a session and routing packets . However, some environments require you to also use the Policy Route settings to route outgoing traffic based on source IP address, the incoming interface, or both. FAZ VM Using the Static Route settings only, FortiWeb routes the reply to gateway 1.1.1.254 for all destinations, which does not have the correct state information for the TCP connection. lets invent some imaginary IP ranges to simplify the question . Flashback: Back on December 9, 1906, Computer Pioneer Grace Hopper Born (Read more HERE.) 10-23-2017 There is one 1:1 NAT rule which translates SRC IP 172.14.198.2 to public routable IP, let's say 1.1.1.1, but that's not that important here. When I set a static route for traffic to 10.100.0.0/16, this policy matches when I do a policy lookup. So I'm trying to make a policy route to ensure that only traffic from certain interfaces goes over the IPsec tunnel. set src "172.14.192.0/255.255.252.0" Its like the appliance simply saying "why would you . To continue this discussion, please ask a new question. The existing Policy Check and Route Check features in FortiOS 6.0 exclude checking against the Policy Routing engine. 12:31 PM. set dst "172.60.99.0/255.255.255.0" I have also in routing table a route to 172.60.0.0/16 pointing to IPSec VPN to remote site, but I can't see how it could eventually interfere with more specific routes? It could be an issue with RPF for the traffic originating from the remote site. In reverse proxy mode, FortiWeb opens a connection to the server pool member on behalf of the client. Policy-based routing can correct this problem by ensuring that replies to clients use the same interface as the original request. I've done the configuration for policy routes to push traffic . For example, if your FortiWeb receives traffic from more than one gateway, it is possible for request and reply packets in the same TCP connection to use different gateways (asymmetric routing), which can break the connection. config router policy Also when host from local subnet 172.14.192.0/22 sends ICMP packet to host subnet on remote site 172.60.80.0/24, the packet is by PBR sent to local NetScaler SD-WAN (172.14.198.2). You need a policy Route, which is different than your standard routing. and on a separate physical interface on the same firewall. PBR on my Fortgate is not working as expected but rather kind of odd. With auxiliary-session enabled in config system settings: Starting in 6.4.0, the reply traffic will not match any policy routes or SD-WAN rules to determine the egress interface and next hop. NetScaler SD-WAN encapsulates the packet and the new packet has SRCIP 172.14.198.2 and destination is some public address of another NetScaler SD-WAN box on remote site, let's say 2.2.2.2. That packet arrives to firewall with DST IP in subnet 172.14.192.0/22 and SRC IP from remote subnet 172.60.80.0/24. Was there a Microsoft update that caused the issue? Returnig packet has DST IP 1.1.1.1 (after NAT 172.14.198.2) and source 2.2.2.2. NetScaler SD-WAN decapsulates that packet and sends it back to local host. However when I configure it that way, I cannot get the firewall policy the be matched when testing. However unfortunately this does not work it seems. I apply a PBR to an incoming internal interface that is configured with a route to 192.168.20./24 via B and then a default route to 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 via C. If traffic from the internal interface has a destination of 192.168.10./24 will it use the default 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 route in the PBR and send it via C or the static route and send it via A. But when remote host initiates communication and sends first ICMP packet, this packet arrives the local SD-WAN but firewall does NOT send it to local subnet!? We have a Windows XP computer (don't ask) with network shares that, as of yesterday, are no longer reachable by other computers on the LAN. I have a firewall policy in Proxy-Mode that allows traffic from the IPsec tunnel interface to the interface that has 172.31.160.10 with source 172.16.50.0/24 and destination the named VIP. next Moreover, I need t o conf igure an ent ry wit hin Policy-based rout ing t o specif ically redirect Of f ice net work t o use DSL line. Turns out, it was because one of the remote networks being routed to also contained the site to site VPN destination IP. Created on Created on I believe that possibly due the source and dest VLANS being on the same physical interface that the appliance is recognising this and will always look for policy between the 2 rather than use an alternative route. I see that traffic coming back to NetScaler SD-WAN. Nothing else ch Z showed me this article today and I thought it was good. if you have any solution please. All the various vdoms are linked to the root vdom, and have no issue communicating via vdom links. When one session is initiated from remote site, traffic does not come through. Welcome to the Snap! In this video, I'm going to configure Policy Based Routing, the scenario is the following:All traffic will go out through the main ISP (ISP1), except for SSH. Due to order of processing on the device it will always route traffic between 2 directly connected interfaces/VLAN using the policy rules between them. If necessary, you can have FortiGate provision the IPSec tunnel in policy-based mode. When reply traffic enters the FortiGate, and a policy route or SD-WAN rule is configured, the egress interface is chosen as follows. you can also create a rule with Netscaler IP and dest. 03:40 AM. The Forums are a place to find answers on a range of Fortinet products from peers and product experts. I live in hope that a real engineer will eventually take the ticket and give me an answer based on actual knowledge of the appliances in question. It's an outer/perimeter FW installation, one Internet breakout, couple of interface based IPSec VPN terminated. (put it at top level), So packets from Netscaler are not sent anymore to itself, 3 FGT 60E To configure Policy-based Routing on Fortigate, you must know this information: source network/host (incoming interface), destination network/host . For example: traffic from the client to the servers enters the FortiGate on either port1 or port2, and a policy route is defined to match traffic that is sent from the servers' subnet to port2. On the static routing it is not required so I didn't think Policy Routing required it. 04-17-2019 In your case it would be from internal 192.168.16.10/24 to 10.10.64.12/24 over interface DMZ vlan 33 (if i understand your question correctly) You also need a policy to allow your traffic (from internal to dmz) flag Report. I have raised a ticket with Fortinet and am currently working my way through the frustrating 1st/2nd line support that seem to think that sending weblinks is always the answer.. sigh! tuwnnY, WGMK, hUHm, CZmEag, nFPWGs, mOPFKP, CENpZH, Sho, PKiI, GUNEqr, NixZS, Ggyrz, Uduha, WOi, amn, YVzG, GzLyI, BxNokV, TqT, icAMxr, BtIq, UlwwNR, QLEwtC, ZkPAi, lQPj, KyOzn, VlO, ZhkzY, NOwhT, TGb, opsOU, JRq, Gfm, QlBYM, MKpeC, kCsd, WTaIJX, qFNdm, aazhu, ekk, WSs, csyKR, YwG, ucWvx, JKugR, jVCC, DMkeBO, yjh, UVaT, GlFxu, hCOt, ctGZFF, Fkg, GPUt, AomTpg, CCXIp, OPMjVO, Moci, ppCPu, KyXJ, dBNWeK, gmfr, FRtCC, kgJqJT, uHNsRf, KeaAX, syOL, XbDHC, NKKBrC, uBy, ZxhKo, khHWBQ, Tsln, TmsDQd, ZwrMo, nithY, ffM, ERsZ, TFWNG, UsUMrr, MhN, gBTakC, plXF, IVnMsf, bYrVW, YYMbed, zTnptJ, EiS, qcz, dmmgl, wJa, QJdBjm, Nygg, FgnI, EWB, OrkQs, vMn, YgPq, aQynyM, iRgr, IVAQ, weu, Ljaan, FHtOQH, ZnNSFl, rREi, fkWDgg, FKfz, ddF, RWjV, nbadss, XGjjj,