<?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 ISP redundancy and Security Zones in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ISP-redundancy-and-Security-Zones/m-p/208349#M39448</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi team!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Two 6400 appliances in the A/S cluster, Gaia R81.20 JHF41. Two ISPs (/29 subnets), Primary/Backup mode. NAT policy is made using Security Zones. Recently we faced the following situation.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When fail-over occurs, ISP from Primary ISP to Backup ISP, all outgoing&amp;nbsp;ICMP requests and TCP sessions are re-established correctly. But some UDP sessions "hang" and are sourced with the address of the Primary ISP.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;TAC in my case wrote that "Old connections will not change NAT by design. This as confirmed by the developer is by design&amp;nbsp; this is because the connection is recorded in the connection table."&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How do I get to automatically perform UDP sessions cleanup from connections table?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2024 15:54:17 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>yura_k</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-03-11T15:54:17Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ISP redundancy and Security Zones</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ISP-redundancy-and-Security-Zones/m-p/208349#M39448</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi team!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Two 6400 appliances in the A/S cluster, Gaia R81.20 JHF41. Two ISPs (/29 subnets), Primary/Backup mode. NAT policy is made using Security Zones. Recently we faced the following situation.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When fail-over occurs, ISP from Primary ISP to Backup ISP, all outgoing&amp;nbsp;ICMP requests and TCP sessions are re-established correctly. But some UDP sessions "hang" and are sourced with the address of the Primary ISP.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;TAC in my case wrote that "Old connections will not change NAT by design. This as confirmed by the developer is by design&amp;nbsp; this is because the connection is recorded in the connection table."&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How do I get to automatically perform UDP sessions cleanup from connections table?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2024 15:54:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ISP-redundancy-and-Security-Zones/m-p/208349#M39448</guid>
      <dc:creator>yura_k</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-03-11T15:54:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISP redundancy and Security Zones</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ISP-redundancy-and-Security-Zones/m-p/208706#M39518</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The way I understand what TAC said, it sounds like this would require an RFE.&lt;BR /&gt;It is possible to remove connections from the connections table (fw tab -x, I believe), but it would require some scripting to parse the connections table and figure out which ones to remove.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:13:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ISP-redundancy-and-Security-Zones/m-p/208706#M39518</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-03-13T22:13:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISP redundancy and Security Zones</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ISP-redundancy-and-Security-Zones/m-p/208709#M39519</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If TAC confirmed it and developer said the same, then what&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/7"&gt;@PhoneBoy&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;advised makes total sense. Sounds like RFE to me.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Best,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Andy&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:41:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ISP-redundancy-and-Security-Zones/m-p/208709#M39519</guid>
      <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-03-13T22:41:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISP redundancy and Security Zones</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ISP-redundancy-and-Security-Zones/m-p/208849#M39553</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi! If I understand correctly, when client A sends UDP data to server B via CP, a virtual UDP session is created, which has a timeout (40 seconds by default).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If a UDP reply from server B to client A arrives, is it a second virtual session, which is in no way linked to the first virtual session?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2024 08:46:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ISP-redundancy-and-Security-Zones/m-p/208849#M39553</guid>
      <dc:creator>yura_k</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-03-15T08:46:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISP redundancy and Security Zones</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ISP-redundancy-and-Security-Zones/m-p/208906#M39569</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If that reply comes within 40 seconds, it's considered part of the same session.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2024 22:49:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ISP-redundancy-and-Security-Zones/m-p/208906#M39569</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-03-15T22:49:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

