Routing precedence and SDWAN

I think the three cases are for explicit routing, and there's a fourth implicit route which is to push the packet out of the gateway. Basically, the ordering of the three breaks any ties if you have multiple explicit routing rules that cover a packet, and if you have none of them the router shrugs its shoulders and pushes it upstream for a decision.

I talked about this here: community.sophos.com/.../routing-in-xgv18-with-sd-wan-pbr

Thanks Lucar, I see that document, I wanted to make sure that with the 19 there had not been some changes.

At my home (where I carry out the tests) I have an ADSL connection and a WWAN cellular connection.

Here my Gateway:

Here my NAT Rule

Here My SD-WAN routes

V19 was installed as an upgrade from V18.
I had noticed that the SDWAN rule above was never met (KB counters is 0). That's why of my question in the forum...

Today doing further tests I tried to clone such SDWAN rule (I just changed the name "Gabriele4G" instead of "Gabriele"  ) and now it works!

So there seem to be problems with converting SDWAN rules from V18 to V19. I would therefore ask you to check this.

Hello Lucar,
returning to the document: community.sophos.com/.../routing-in-xgv18-with-sd-wan-pbr
Is it not appropriate to automatically insert in the table of static routes the directly connected networks ? (without giving way to delete them)

I mean they appear here

Basically there is no need to do this. If you go SD-WAN, it will be overwritten anyway. If you are in Static routing, most customer understand, that direct attached are there. For visibility, maybe - But it would be just a visibility feature. 

For visibility OK or what command I need to use to see current route?

In Advanced Shell I use: ip route show table all 

The problem is, SD-WAN will and can be used on packet level. It is a new concept and SFOS leaves the "old school routing world" you are looking at. Therefore a ip route shows you the entire "static stack" but will ignore the SD-WAN part. SD-WAN is a dynamic world. There is no "Tell me which route SFOS will take for this particular client". Because it could rely on "I can tell you the answer RIGHT NOW, but it could change by SLAs etc.". 

So if you want to look at the old world (static) use the diagnostic tab in SFOS webadmin. It will show you the route. For SD-WAN, this is dynamic and depending on different factors. 

SD-WAN is a new concept, I agree with you, but it is a concept that intelligently identifies which route to select among those present, based on various parameters and the occurrence of a situation. Knowing the contents of the firewall routing table (even for diagnosis purposes only) is another matter that is missing!
I have 3 networks in my house but in a company there could also be 30 networks present. Having a place to see them would be appropriate.
Leaving aside that with the Home version we never have to deal with 30 networks, so there is no need to have the advanced shell, however, building a command in the console to display the routing table would help. We all know that Cisco's success has been such also because it gave powerful diagnostic tools in its hands.
I apologize if I went off-topic with respect to my initial problem which I repeat is the conversion of SDWAN rules between version 18 and 19, which I ask you to do further verification.

Thanks

What is missing? SD-Routing is the same concept in V18 vs V19. It simply has another layer of "What to do, if the route hits". A more dynamic part of Sd-WAN. 

Simple: A place where I can see the firewall routing table.  For example:

https://docs.fortinet.com/document/fortigate/6.0.0/cli-reference/372042/router-info-routing-table