- Products
- Learn
- Local User Groups
- Partners
- More
What’s New in Identity and Trust?
11 November @ 5pm CET / 11am EST
AI Security Masters
Security in the Pace of AI:
From Threat to Force Multiplier
CPX is Back!
Join us in Las Vegas, Vienna, and/or Bangkok!
What’s New in Agentic Network Orchestration
CheckMates Go:
Fun Ding
Hi everyone!
Setup: Newly installed ClusterXL+SMS (R81.20 JHF Take 84)
The standby member was not updating its IPS database, and in order make it work, I followed sk43807 and added the ports and protocols to the table.def file on the SMS. It worked perfectly fine and the standby member was able to update its IPS database to the same version as the active node.
Although the standby member can update its IPS version, the output of fw tab -t no_hide_services_ports -u does not show the ports and protocols that I added through the table.def file.
After that, I deleted the added ports and protocols from the table.def file and clicked on 'Install Policy'. It failed with the following error message:
"Policy installation failed on gateway. If the problem persists contact Check Point support (Error code: 0-1-2000096)."
I have already looked up the error code on support.checkpoint.com, and read the only two CheckMates links that it gave me (this and this). I also read all the seemingly similar SKs about policy installation errors. However there is no information about this specific error code.
Additionally, I tried replacing the table.def file from another newly installed setup, removed and reinstalled JHF package, used policy_debug.sh, manually debugged cpm, fwm, fwd and cpd processes while installing policy. I found nothing that seems useful.
Threat Prevention policy installs with no issues.
It is just a lab, but I wonder what I would do if one of our customers had a similar issue (before opening a TAC ticket). I don't think opening a TAC ticket for my case is currently necessary.
Where else can I look? Did anyone else encounter such an issue?
Cheers!
@Gaurav_Pandya doing # fw fetch <IP-of-SMS> told me this:
Management rejected fetch for this module - sic name does not match.
Policy Fetch Failed
And then I went on and reestablished SIC on both nodes, and everything worked perfectly fine.
Thank you very much!
As a side note, it's kind of a shame that I didn't see anything related to non-matching SIC names in all the debugs I did.
This is the only reference for 0-1-2000096, so I'll hijack and mention that another possible reason for this error is high memory utilization. Rebooting the gateways clears the error.
Hi,
Try to fetch policy from below command, it will give more description why policy installation is failing.
#fetch policy <mgmt_IP>
Never heard of this commend - i always use
fw -d fetch <Master 1>
|
|
Specifies the Check Point computer(s), from which to fetch the policy. You can fetch the policy from the Management Server, or a peer Cluster Member.
|
Right. "fetch policy" is for SMB appliances. You need to run "fw fetch" command.
@Gaurav_Pandya doing # fw fetch <IP-of-SMS> told me this:
Management rejected fetch for this module - sic name does not match.
Policy Fetch Failed
And then I went on and reestablished SIC on both nodes, and everything worked perfectly fine.
Thank you very much!
As a side note, it's kind of a shame that I didn't see anything related to non-matching SIC names in all the debugs I did.
If policy install fails for other reasons than time out, checking communication/SIC in Dashboard is always the first step before doing debugs...
Hello All,
I have got the same problem, but after resetting the SIC in doesn't work again in a few minutes...
My infrastructure consists of two SMB 1900 devices managed over the Internet using SMS R81.20. The SMB 1900 doesn't support ClusterXL that's why I set up Small Office Cluster - is it correct Cluster for SMB 1900? Although the installation of policies does not work for me, the logs are recorded without problems, i.e. there is still some kind of communication between SMB and SMS.
This is the only reference for 0-1-2000096, so I'll hijack and mention that another possible reason for this error is high memory utilization. Rebooting the gateways clears the error.
Definitely!
Leaderboard
Epsum factorial non deposit quid pro quo hic escorol.
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 30 | |
| 15 | |
| 11 | |
| 7 | |
| 5 | |
| 4 | |
| 4 | |
| 4 | |
| 4 | |
| 4 |
Tue 10 Nov 2026 @ 06:00 PM (IST)
Under the Hood: Introducing Check Point Cloud Firewall as a ServiceTue 10 Nov 2026 @ 08:00 PM (IST)
Check Point Mobile Security | Extending Zero Trust with NetskopeThu 12 Nov 2026 @ 11:00 AM (EST)
Tips and Tricks 2026 #15: Check Point MDR and Incident ResponseTue 10 Nov 2026 @ 06:00 PM (IST)
Under the Hood: Introducing Check Point Cloud Firewall as a ServiceTue 10 Nov 2026 @ 08:00 PM (IST)
Check Point Mobile Security | Extending Zero Trust with NetskopeThu 12 Nov 2026 @ 11:00 AM (EST)
Tips and Tricks 2026 #15: Check Point MDR and Incident ResponseTue 17 Nov 2026 @ 08:30 AM (EST)
Bogota Breakfast & Hack: IA bajo control y ataques en vivo con Workspace SecurityAbout CheckMates
Learn Check Point
Advanced Learning
WE SECURE YOUR AI TRANSFORMATION