This discussion has been locked.

You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Moving WAN from one interface to antoher

Hi all, I have a SG330 setup with HA, and I've upgraded my internet connection requiring me to move my WAN traffic from one interface to another. I have quite a few addresses registered on the internet facing interface, and hence quite a few rules. Any way to do this efficiently with as little downtime as possible? I've inherited the setup, so there may be things I would miss if I'm doing this by hand.

This thread was automatically locked due to age.

0 Jaydeep over 4 years ago

Hi BjørnEirik,

You will have to manually change each rule if you have multiple WAN links and you're moving one of them from one interface to another. If you only have a single WAN link, please change your Firewall rules to select WAN link load balance. Once you've changed your ISP link to a different interface, it will allow the internet to work find from WAN Link load balance. However, if you have your firewall rule configured to use additional addresses of the WAN link, you will have to manually change the rules.

Regards

Jaydeep
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel
0 lferrara over 4 years ago in reply to Jaydeep

@Jaydeep

it should be a way to update the sql data in a single step and reduce or eliminate the effort. XG is using zone concept but still moving from one interface to another is a nightmare. Same thing if you want to move from a 1Gb NIC to a 10 Gb ethernet for LAN zone.

Moving interfaces should be easier and not bind to a HW. This should be fixed very soon. If you have 50 rules, imagine the stress and the effort required!
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel
+1 lferrara over 4 years ago in reply to lferrara

I opened a feature request. Please vote it:

https://ideas.sophos.com/forums/330219-xg-firewall/suggestions/39329878-change-port-without-editing-firewall-rules-or-othe

Regards
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel
0 Jaydeep over 4 years ago in reply to lferrara

Thanks

It is a limitation as of now but it can be accomplished easily(I don't much about coding) and sounds like a good idea. I'll vote for it as well.

Regards

Jaydeep
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel