<?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 sk123035 resolved in Check Point R80.20.35 ! in Spark Firewall (SMB)</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/sk123035-resolved-in-Check-Point-R80-20-35/m-p/144872#M6644</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="cp_link sc_ellipsis" href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk123035&amp;amp;partition=Advanced&amp;amp;product=Quantum" data-hasqtip="4" aria-describedby="qtip-4" target="_blank"&gt;sk123035: Application Control &amp;amp; URL Filtering blade does not work properly on locally managed SMB appliances that deploy tag based VLANs over bridge mode&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;up to now told us that this limitation will be lifted in the next firmware version. And the winner is:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk174683" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;Check Point R80.20.35&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2022 09:50:25 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>G_W_Albrecht</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2022-03-28T09:50:25Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>sk123035 resolved in Check Point R80.20.35 !</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/sk123035-resolved-in-Check-Point-R80-20-35/m-p/144872#M6644</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="cp_link sc_ellipsis" href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk123035&amp;amp;partition=Advanced&amp;amp;product=Quantum" data-hasqtip="4" aria-describedby="qtip-4" target="_blank"&gt;sk123035: Application Control &amp;amp; URL Filtering blade does not work properly on locally managed SMB appliances that deploy tag based VLANs over bridge mode&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;up to now told us that this limitation will be lifted in the next firmware version. And the winner is:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk174683" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;Check Point R80.20.35&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2022 09:50:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/sk123035-resolved-in-Check-Point-R80-20-35/m-p/144872#M6644</guid>
      <dc:creator>G_W_Albrecht</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-28T09:50:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: sk123035 resolved in Check Point R80.20.35 !</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/sk123035-resolved-in-Check-Point-R80-20-35/m-p/144875#M6645</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Talking about the next firmware version - I saw&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk178509" target="_self"&gt;sk178509&lt;/A&gt; was released and then restricted (Policy installation failure on R81 SMB after uninstalling R81.10 JHF).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Hopefully that means that the R81 release for Spark is imminent&lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":beaming_face_with_smiling_eyes:"&gt;😁&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2022 10:02:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/sk123035-resolved-in-Check-Point-R80-20-35/m-p/144875#M6645</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ruan_Kotze</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-28T10:02:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: sk123035 resolved in Check Point R80.20.35 !</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/sk123035-resolved-in-Check-Point-R80-20-35/m-p/144880#M6646</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Not very - was alpha only 4 weeks ago. Adding http/2, better SSL inspection, CCP Unicast, TE + AV improvements regarding archives, file types and enhanced email inspection is a fine thing...&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;But '&lt;SPAN&gt;after uninstalling R81.10 JHF' does not sound like SMB as you can not uninstall a firmware version, only install another firmware version over it !&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2022 10:23:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/sk123035-resolved-in-Check-Point-R80-20-35/m-p/144880#M6646</guid>
      <dc:creator>G_W_Albrecht</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-28T10:23:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: sk123035 resolved in Check Point R80.20.35 !</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/sk123035-resolved-in-Check-Point-R80-20-35/m-p/144885#M6647</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;What I saw from the SK is that the R81.10 refers to the SMS managing the SMB device.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2022 10:45:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/sk123035-resolved-in-Check-Point-R80-20-35/m-p/144885#M6647</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ruan_Kotze</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-28T10:45:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: sk123035 resolved in Check Point R80.20.35 !</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/sk123035-resolved-in-Check-Point-R80-20-35/m-p/144899#M6648</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I remember opening a SR for it back then and was surprised they also decided to used my simple diagram for this SK. brings back memories..&lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":grinning_squinting_face:"&gt;😆&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Anyways, per working with this RFE I assumed this would be implemented by creating virtual interfaces on bridge for each tagged VLAN (like some other vendors do), but it turned out we create an additional network interface (away from production) and specify that interface for UserCheck redirect. &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Yes, this works for us.. but I was just wondering how other SMB users thought about it.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/21294"&gt;@G_W_Albrecht&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;Does it work for you?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2022 12:45:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/sk123035-resolved-in-Check-Point-R80-20-35/m-p/144899#M6648</guid>
      <dc:creator>Tom_Hinoue</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-03-28T12:45:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

