- Products
- Learn
- Local User Groups
- Partners
- More
MVP 2026: Submissions
Are Now Open!
What's New in R82.10?
10 December @ 5pm CET / 11am ET
Announcing Quantum R82.10!
Learn MoreOverlap in Security Validation
Help us to understand your needs better
CheckMates Go:
Maestro Madness
Hello all!
Just completed an upgrade of management to R81.20 from R81.10. It manages 3 x clusters currently running on R80.40 (upgrade imminent).
One of the clusters is used for the remote access VPN, and now when pushing policy we get the following error:
"You can use updateable objects, dynamic objects and domain objects in a Remote Access VPN community only as members of a network group whose name starts with 'exclusions_'. The group whose name starts with 'exclusions_' must be a member of another network group."
There is only one domain object in use and I've tried this workaround and it still fails. The only way to get a successful policy installation is to remove the domain object from the RA encryption domain entirely.
TAC have not been much use so far.
Any ideas?
So it seems that it's only supported in gateways from R81.20.
Why it didn't give this error message in the production environment I don't know.
Hey,
Can you send a screenshot please? I can try it in my lab and report back.
Best,
Andy
OK so this seems to be expected behaviour (working as intended). Domain objects are not permitted in the encryption domain for an remote access VPN except in a very specific scenario detailed here.
Clearly this has never worked, but until now it's not really been flagged up or enforced during a policy installation.
This part is actuallly true, just tested it.
Andy
"You can use updateable objects, dynamic objects and domain objects in a Remote Access VPN community only as members of a network group whose name starts with 'exclusions_'. The group whose name starts with 'exclusions_' must be a member of another network group."
We couldn't get that to work. Is it possibly due to the gateways still being R80.40?
Not sure, but it might be only possible in R81+
Andy
Would you mind screenshotting what you've done so I can compare it to what we have please?
So it seems that it's only supported in gateways from R81.20.
Why it didn't give this error message in the production environment I don't know.
Not sure, but it would seem so.
Best,
Andy
Sorry to revisit this a year later, but wanted to check something with you. We actually used this method recrntly with a customer to add 2 domain objects into group that started with exclusions_ and then added that group into RA vpn domain. Worked like a charm.
Now, tested today with another client, it failed, but could have been the domain itself. Now, TAC is telling us this exclusions_ group is used to exclude things, NOT include them, which makes sense 100%, BUT, its still not clear to me, for sure.
Thoughts?
Andy
Doesn't work in R82 either.
Leaderboard
Epsum factorial non deposit quid pro quo hic escorol.
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 17 | |
| 16 | |
| 8 | |
| 7 | |
| 7 | |
| 4 | |
| 3 | |
| 3 | |
| 2 | |
| 2 |
Fri 12 Dec 2025 @ 10:00 AM (CET)
Check Mates Live Netherlands: #41 AI & Multi Context ProtocolTue 16 Dec 2025 @ 05:00 PM (CET)
Under the Hood: CloudGuard Network Security for Oracle Cloud - Config and Autoscaling!Fri 12 Dec 2025 @ 10:00 AM (CET)
Check Mates Live Netherlands: #41 AI & Multi Context ProtocolTue 16 Dec 2025 @ 05:00 PM (CET)
Under the Hood: CloudGuard Network Security for Oracle Cloud - Config and Autoscaling!Thu 18 Dec 2025 @ 10:00 AM (CET)
Cloud Architect Series - Building a Hybrid Mesh Security Strategy across cloudsAbout CheckMates
Learn Check Point
Advanced Learning
YOU DESERVE THE BEST SECURITY