Hello,

I have a Safe @ Office 500. In that I have a firewall entry WAN where a cable comes with 3 ip's.
I would like the traffic of each WAN IP was directed to a LAN port.
Anyone know what to say if the Safe @ Office 500 do it? And if does, as this set?

Today it is my setup: (IPs fictitious)
WAN IP 200.150.150.215 / 200.2150.150.216 / 200.2150.150.217 Submask 255.255.255.128
LAN:
192.168.10.1 (sofa500)
192.168.10.2 (lan 1)
192.168.10.3 (lan 2)
192.168.10.4 (lan 3)

Basically I have the rules released the traffic on the doors of my interest.
I am defined as a Route
Source Network: 200.150.150.0
Netmask Source: 255.255.255.128
Destination Network: 192.168.10.0
Destination Netmask: 255.255.255.0
Service: Any
Next Hop Ip: 192.168.10.2

So what's happening is that with only route for the first server's internal network.

How do to the office @ 500 safe route for other LANS?


Safe @ Office 500 - 7.5.55x

quote:

So what's happening is that with only route for the first server's internal network.

Hmmm, if it were me doing it, I would do the following:

• Create a "Single Computer" network object called "Computer1" (or whatever floats your boat) for 192.168.10.2. While creating the network object, choose the checkbox "Perform Static NAT", and enter the IP 200.150.150.215.
  
• Create an "Allow" rule (not allow and forward) with the Source set as WAN, the destination set as "Computer1" and the service to be "Any".
  

You don't need to do anything with routes or anything else, the Safe@Office automagically works all of that stuff out - arp entries, routes etc.

The hosts that you are forwarding all traffic to have to have the Safe@Office LAN IP as their default gateway.

------------------

Note that this assumes several things - firstly that you have 3 available IP addresses IN ADDITION to the one you are using on the WAN port of your Safe@Office.

If you only have 2 additional, and the one you are using on the safe@office it becomes a little more difficult - you would need to do an allow and forward rule with the one that is assigned to the Safe@Office. It would be cleaner if the safe @office had it's own IP.

Secondly, this is a massively insecure setup - basically it is turning your expensive firewall into a router. Normally you would create specific rules to forward the ports you need (25/53/80/110/443 etc) through to the hosts and drop all other traffic.

Hope that isn't too confusing.

Clayton