<?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: no traffic flow with IPv6 and all SGMs active in Hyperscale Firewall (Maestro)</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180589#M1610</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;No. We mentioned that the bug is described "&lt;SPAN&gt;local IPv6 traffic from Active members may fail&lt;/SPAN&gt;", but we have no problem with traffic from gateway. TAC said it's more an general IPv6 problem then described in the jumbos release notes.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2023 05:16:25 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Wolfgang</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-05-11T05:16:25Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>no traffic flow with IPv6 and all SGMs active</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180563#M1603</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Our journey to IPv6 with Maestro will be an endless story….&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;At this time we are on R81.10 Jumbo take 94. IPv6 traffic to and from our VSX virtual systems are working fine, but no packetflow &amp;nbsp;through the virtual systems. Debugs shows the packets are lost somewhere in the Maestro environment. Last night we did some other checks to debug another problem and we stopped all SGMs except one. Surprise surprise….., now we can see IPv6 traffic going through all our virtual systems. Setting one additional SGM active stops all IPv6 traffic, maybe a problem with the distribution….&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;TAC case is open and they suggest to install Jumbo take 95. But we are not happy with not recommended Jumbos. Take 95 includes :&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;PRJ-44881,&amp;nbsp;PMTR-86526 &amp;nbsp;After an upgrade, local IPv6 traffic from Active members may fail.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Can someone confirm that our problem will be solved with Jumbo take 95? Anyone using IPv6 with Maestro?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 May 2023 19:21:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180563#M1603</guid>
      <dc:creator>Wolfgang</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-10T19:21:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: no traffic flow with IPv6 and all SGMs active</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180574#M1607</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;It sounds promising.&lt;BR /&gt;Has TAC explained the nature of the bug and how it applies in your specific case?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 May 2023 21:41:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180574#M1607</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-10T21:41:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: no traffic flow with IPv6 and all SGMs active</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180589#M1610</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;No. We mentioned that the bug is described "&lt;SPAN&gt;local IPv6 traffic from Active members may fail&lt;/SPAN&gt;", but we have no problem with traffic from gateway. TAC said it's more an general IPv6 problem then described in the jumbos release notes.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2023 05:16:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180589#M1610</guid>
      <dc:creator>Wolfgang</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-11T05:16:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: no traffic flow with IPv6 and all SGMs active</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180601#M1612</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Do you have the following messages in fwk.elg:&lt;BR /&gt;[vs_0];[tid_1];[fw4_1];FW-1: fw_drv_is_if_type_ex_by_ifn: illegal ifn: -1;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;It's one of the symptoms that &lt;SPAN&gt;PRJ-44881,&amp;nbsp;PMTR-86526&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;fixes.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;EDIT:&lt;BR /&gt;On second thought, I believe&amp;nbsp;that you need to install&amp;nbsp;the fix anyway because&amp;nbsp;you have IPv6 traffic.&lt;BR /&gt;In addition, I think that it will solve your issue.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2023 08:32:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180601#M1612</guid>
      <dc:creator>Olegf</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-11T08:32:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: no traffic flow with IPv6 and all SGMs active</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180611#M1614</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk180634" target="_self"&gt;sk180634&lt;/A&gt; describes that&amp;nbsp;IPv6 neighbor solicitation may fail on some SGMs.&lt;BR /&gt;Until installation of JHF Take 95 you can set static &lt;SPAN&gt;static IP neighbor entries&lt;/SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;as workaround:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;LI-CODE lang="markup"&gt;add neighbor-entry ipv6-address x:x:x:x:x:x:x:x macaddress
yy:yy:yy:yy:yy:yy interface zzzzz&lt;/LI-CODE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2023 10:03:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180611#M1614</guid>
      <dc:creator>Danny</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-11T10:03:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: no traffic flow with IPv6 and all SGMs active</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180638#M1615</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We can see such entries&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;[11 May 15:46:33][fw4_0];[vs_0];FW-1: fw_drv_is_if_type_ex_by_ifn: illegal ifn: -1&lt;BR /&gt;[11 May 15:46:33][fw4_0];[vs_0];FW-1: fw_drv_is_if_type_ex_by_ifn: illegal ifn: -1&lt;BR /&gt;[11 May 15:46:33][fw4_0];[vs_0];FW-1: fw_drv_is_if_type_ex_by_ifn: illegal ifn: -1&lt;BR /&gt;[11 May 15:46:33][fw4_0];[vs_0];FW-1: fw_drv_is_if_type_ex_by_ifn: illegal ifn: -1&lt;BR /&gt;[11 May 15:46:33][fw4_0];[vs_0];FW-1: fw_drv_is_if_type_ex_by_ifn: illegal ifn: -1&lt;BR /&gt;[11 May 15:46:33][fw4_0];[vs_0];FW-1: fw_drv_is_if_type_ex_by_ifn: illegal ifn: -1&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I believe take 95 is needed &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":disappointed_face:"&gt;😞&lt;/span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2023 14:45:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/no-traffic-flow-with-IPv6-and-all-SGMs-active/m-p/180638#M1615</guid>
      <dc:creator>Wolfgang</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-11T14:45:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

