- CheckMates
- :
- Products
- :
- Quantum
- :
- Management
- :
- R80.10 Migration Uniqueness name problem
- 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
R80.10 Migration Uniqueness name problem
Just finished to import my policy and configuration from R77.10 to a new Management R80.10.
Some uniqueness name errors apeared and all of them could be solved until this one:
One of the node names in the Checkpoint FW object is "fw1" like the service "FW1" (port 256), neither of them allow me to change his names.
Service it seems to be read only ... and I suspect that changing node name isnt an option in the Management.
There is a way to solve this?
Thanks.
UPDATE: As described in sk40179 FW1 or fw1 are reserved names...
The solution is to change the cluster node object resetting the SIC.
I'm thinking to change predefined service name FW1 using some advice about it?
dbedit> print services FW1
Object Name: FW1
Object UID: {97AEB388-9AEA-11D5-BD16-0090272CCB30}
Class Name: tcp_service
Table Name: services
Last Modified by: System
Last Modified from: localhost
Last Modification time: Mon May 7 13:03:06 2018
Fields Details
--------------
aggressive_aging_timeout: 600
color: firebrick
comments: Check Point Security Gateway Service
default_aggressive_aging_timeout: 0
delayed_sync_value: 30
enable_aggressive_aging: true
enable_tcp_resource: false
etm_enabled: false
has_detect: false
include_in_any: true
inspect_streaming: NULL
is_default_aggressive_timeout: true
port: 256
prohibit_aggressive_aging: false
proto_type: NULL
protocol_uuid:
reload_proof: false
service_port_type: customize
spoofed_rst_detect: true
src_port:
sync_on_cluster: true
timeout: 3600
type: Tcp
unified_streaming: NULL
updated_by_sd: false
use_default_session_timeout: true
use_delayed_sync: false
- Tags:
- dbedit...
- uniqueness
Accepted Solutions
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi Lluis,
I had this exact issue a couple of months ago and, like you, resolved it my changing the gateway name.
I don't think it would be recommended to change the name of a pre-defined service as it could cause issues next time you upgrade.
Dave
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi Lluis,
I had this exact issue a couple of months ago and, like you, resolved it my changing the gateway name.
I don't think it would be recommended to change the name of a pre-defined service as it could cause issues next time you upgrade.
Dave
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
FW1 has long since been a reserved word.
Unfortunately, SmartDashboard (and predecessors) didn't always block creation of objects with this name.
In R80.x we block modifications to default services.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
SOLVED: Finally we changed the gateway name.
We reset the SIC to change the node name:
Management shell:Smart Dashboard:
- [Expert@HostName]# cp_conf sic init New_Activation_Key norestart
- [Expert@HostName]# cpwd_admin stop -name CPD -path "$CPDIR/bin/cpd_admin" -command "cpd_admin stop"
- [Expert@HostName]# cpwd_admin start -name CPD -path "$CPDIR/bin/cpd" -command "cpd"
Click on the Security Gateway object.
Click on 'Communication'.
Click 'Reset' and confirm.
Enter the New_Activation_Key (that was used in the 'cp_conf sic init ...' command on Security Gateway).
Click on 'Initialize'.
Install policy, if needed.
Thanks
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Sorry to revive such an old thread but I have the same situation and checkpoint told me to follow:
I'm questioning the need to remove the cluster itself from every VPN community and disable VPN blade before renaming the member firewall.
Did you have to do that in order to get the name changed? They are stating without that step it may cause IPSec VPN issues. Did you experience any?
