<?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: Port Translation in Spark Firewall (SMB)</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Port-Translation/m-p/181519#M8947</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes, am waiting on a response from tech support to this very question.&amp;nbsp; Based upon an almost 90 minute troubleshooting procedure, it is believed it is a bug.&amp;nbsp; Since I do not know much about the CLI yet, thought there might be an end around to mitigate this.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 20 May 2023 00:34:41 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Jon_AK</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-05-20T00:34:41Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Port Translation</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Port-Translation/m-p/181514#M8945</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;With a CP1575 appliance, is there a way to create a rule to work with port forwarding to ensure the appliance does not translate the intended port to a different port?&amp;nbsp; As indicated in a previous post, I have a server object created to forward HTTP traffic on port 80 and 443 to a IIS web server.&amp;nbsp; The appliance is forwarding as designed but it is translating port 80 into a different, random port number.&amp;nbsp; Unfortunately, according to Microsoft, if the IIS website is bound to port 80, it will listen only to port 80 traffic.&amp;nbsp; As a result, our website is not responding to the incoming port 80 traffic.&amp;nbsp; I went as far as reverting back to an earlier firmware version where this was working fine but, that did not cure the ill.&amp;nbsp; I read some CP documentation for a 1500 series but the settings being described do not match &amp;amp; am not able to find in the UI where to address having the appliance not translate the port into a different port.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 May 2023 21:55:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Port-Translation/m-p/181514#M8945</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jon_AK</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-19T21:55:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Port Translation</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Port-Translation/m-p/181518#M8946</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I recall that someone else posted about this same problem.&lt;BR /&gt;Believe it's a bug and the TAC should be consulted: &lt;A href="https://help.checkpoint.com" target="_blank"&gt;https://help.checkpoint.com&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 20 May 2023 00:30:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Port-Translation/m-p/181518#M8946</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-20T00:30:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Port Translation</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Port-Translation/m-p/181519#M8947</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes, am waiting on a response from tech support to this very question.&amp;nbsp; Based upon an almost 90 minute troubleshooting procedure, it is believed it is a bug.&amp;nbsp; Since I do not know much about the CLI yet, thought there might be an end around to mitigate this.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 20 May 2023 00:34:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Port-Translation/m-p/181519#M8947</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jon_AK</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-20T00:34:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

