<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: VPN with 3rd party - Scenario 3 - Implicit inclusion of external addresses in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VPN-with-3rd-party-Scenario-3-Implicit-inclusion-of-external/m-p/121083#M17214</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Recommend a TAC case here.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2021 03:31:50 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-06-14T03:31:50Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>VPN with 3rd party - Scenario 3 - Implicit inclusion of external addresses</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VPN-with-3rd-party-Scenario-3-Implicit-inclusion-of-external/m-p/120937#M17186</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Have applied the mentioned solution on an R80.40 manager with R80.40 gws (take 91)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Unfortunately i still see the external addresses trying to be negotiated by the checkpoint&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;My $FWDIR/lib/crypt.def looks like in the attached screenshot, dst ip addresses are remote peers.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Policy pushes fine but the TSi, TSr still wrong. Yes, IKEv2 btw.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Any ideas?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Cheers&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;DIV class="mceNonEditable lia-copypaste-placeholder"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;DIV class="mceNonEditable lia-copypaste-placeholder"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2021 10:50:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VPN-with-3rd-party-Scenario-3-Implicit-inclusion-of-external/m-p/120937#M17186</guid>
      <dc:creator>Juan_</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-06-11T10:50:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VPN with 3rd party - Scenario 3 - Implicit inclusion of external addresses</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VPN-with-3rd-party-Scenario-3-Implicit-inclusion-of-external/m-p/121083#M17214</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Recommend a TAC case here.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2021 03:31:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VPN-with-3rd-party-Scenario-3-Implicit-inclusion-of-external/m-p/121083#M17214</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-06-14T03:31:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

