- CheckMates
- :
- Products
- :
- General Topics
- :
- Re: R82 Site to Site VPN with third party Router
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Printer Friendly Page
Are you a member of CheckMates?
×- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
R82 Site to Site VPN with third party Router
Hi Checkpoint Gurus
I'm trying to set up a site-to-site VPN with a third-party GW (Router). In the new R82, it looks like there is a feature called "Enhanced link selection."
In my GW object, I've defined the External interface as Enhanced Link Selection. But realistically, we don't know how third-party devices are configured. All we do is exchange the security parameters with the given IP address and accept the interesting traffic.
The problem is that I cannot set up my VPN community in Enhanced mode without defining an Enhanced link selection on the third-party object. This doesn't make sense.
The error message says, "The VPN Community is configured to use "Enhanced Link Selection. "At least one VPN peer does not have configured interfaces. You must configure Enhanced Link Selection Interfaces in each VPN peer object."
Please refer to the attached pictures.
We cannot define interface details on third-party objects, and it's not practical to ask our vendors for this information.
Your help is much appreciated!!!
Accepted Solutions
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
@TINTIN8 Hopefully screenshots I sent are good enough, but if not, let me know.
Andy
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
I did this in my R82 lab, will send you some screenshots tomorrow. Error is telling you that peer link selection is incorrect, thats why.
Andy
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Thanks the_rock!!!
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Of course @TINTIN8
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Please see attached.
Andy
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Thank you soooo much!!! it worked!!!
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Glad we can help.
Andy
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
For interoperable objects, the interface name doesn't have to match what the remote end actually uses.
You can use something generic like eth0.
The important thing is that interfaces are defined with the correct IP addresses.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
@TINTIN8 Hopefully screenshots I sent are good enough, but if not, let me know.
Andy
