<?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: tunnel using udp port 4500 in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/tunnel-using-udp-port-4500/m-p/97505#M8816</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;As port 4500 is used for NAT Traversal traffic you can do 2 things, when you have NAT addresses available you can use NAT for both ends or just one end and only have 1 end setup the VPN, for that one use hide NAT behind the gateway.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The other option is to setup MSS clamping on your VPN, a good idea anyway, and reduce the MSS to 1396 so there will not be to much fragmentation. I do not know what type of traffic will be running across this tunnel but if it is only sync traffic between the Aruba units than it should be no problem.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2020 23:05:34 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Maarten_Sjouw</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-09-24T23:05:34Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>tunnel using udp port 4500</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/tunnel-using-udp-port-4500/m-p/97463#M8815</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;we've got a new requirement which is to tunnel trafic on port udp 4500, which is coming from an Aruba wifi controller MD on a remote site, to an Aruba controller MM which is at HQ.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Setup thus looks like :&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;MM - CP VSX VPN - internet - CP VPN GW - MD&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;VSX VPN = 80.30&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;GW = 77.20&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The vpn community is setup that udp port 4500 (defined as IKE_NAT_TRAVERSAL) is actually excluded.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Basically meaning that udp port 4500 trafic going from MD to MM will be dropped since private addresses are used.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Aruba is unable to change the port.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We've already tested a setup where we assigned a public ip to MM, and connected this way successfully.&amp;nbsp; But i was wondering if there is another way to avoid this?&amp;nbsp; And not expose the MM to the public internet.&amp;nbsp; Someone hinted that if we define a new service udp_4500 and create rulebases specific on that service it could work.&amp;nbsp; Has anyone faced a similar issue and found a solution?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2020 14:40:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/tunnel-using-udp-port-4500/m-p/97463#M8815</guid>
      <dc:creator>pnobels</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-24T14:40:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: tunnel using udp port 4500</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/tunnel-using-udp-port-4500/m-p/97505#M8816</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;As port 4500 is used for NAT Traversal traffic you can do 2 things, when you have NAT addresses available you can use NAT for both ends or just one end and only have 1 end setup the VPN, for that one use hide NAT behind the gateway.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The other option is to setup MSS clamping on your VPN, a good idea anyway, and reduce the MSS to 1396 so there will not be to much fragmentation. I do not know what type of traffic will be running across this tunnel but if it is only sync traffic between the Aruba units than it should be no problem.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2020 23:05:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/tunnel-using-udp-port-4500/m-p/97505#M8816</guid>
      <dc:creator>Maarten_Sjouw</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-24T23:05:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

