PhoneNewbie
IS-IT--Management
Hi there,
I have a Checkpoint Express NGX with 3 interfaces, 1 WAN, 1 LAN and one DMZ. After the intial install, everything appears to be ok, I can ping all the interfaces from the various networks and all is ok. The problem comes from trying to create a static NAT entry for our mail server in the DMZ.
On the firewall properties, I do NOT have hide all internal intefaces behind external interfaces checked.
I have created network objects for both the lan and dmz that ARE set to hide behind the gateway.
I have created a host object for the mail server on the dmz with a dmz address. I can ping the dmz address of the mail server from the lan. On the NAT tab of the host object, I selected static entry and entered the real routable address.
After installing the policy, I can still ping the dmz address but I cannot ping the routable address of the same box. Please advise what I'm doing wrong. Thanks so much!
Stu
PS - I currently have a default allow rule for all interfaces so there shouldn't be anything blocking security-wise, just nat screwup wise
I have a Checkpoint Express NGX with 3 interfaces, 1 WAN, 1 LAN and one DMZ. After the intial install, everything appears to be ok, I can ping all the interfaces from the various networks and all is ok. The problem comes from trying to create a static NAT entry for our mail server in the DMZ.
On the firewall properties, I do NOT have hide all internal intefaces behind external interfaces checked.
I have created network objects for both the lan and dmz that ARE set to hide behind the gateway.
I have created a host object for the mail server on the dmz with a dmz address. I can ping the dmz address of the mail server from the lan. On the NAT tab of the host object, I selected static entry and entered the real routable address.
After installing the policy, I can still ping the dmz address but I cannot ping the routable address of the same box. Please advise what I'm doing wrong. Thanks so much!
Stu
PS - I currently have a default allow rule for all interfaces so there shouldn't be anything blocking security-wise, just nat screwup wise