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

UTM using Masquerade not NAT

Hi,

I'm seeing some strange behaviour for NAT of DMZ traffic out to the Internet. Traffic is allowed both outbound and inbound;

 

There is a masquerade rule in place for the internal network;

Source: Internal_Network (10.0/8 and 192.168.0/16)
Interface: External
Use Address: <<Primary Address >> (x.x.144.58/29)

 

There are also specific NAT rules in place for the DMZ network above (10.10.50.0/24);

 

However, a tcpdump shows that HTTPS traffic out to the internet is sitting behind the Primary Address (x.x.144.58) and not the SNAT address (x.x.144.61)

 

<M> utm01:/root # tcpdump -v -nni eth1 host 35.156.229.155 and tcp
tcpdump: listening on eth1, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes
11:20:33.243219 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 62526, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60)
x.x.144.58.39422 > 35.156.229.155.443: Flags [S ], cksum 0x64d1 (incorrect -> 0x256d), seq 2987452050, win 29200, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 81203884 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 0
11:20:33.559246 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 39, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60)
35.156.229.155.443 > x.x.144.58.39422: Flags [S.], cksum 0x2142 (correct), seq 1583871935, ack 2987452051, win 28960, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 713589850 ecr 81203884,nop,wscale 7], length 0

 

Any ideas what might be affecting that? I'm checking on the routing to see if there is anything that needs to be updated there.

Thanks,

Colin



This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • Hi Colin,

    SNAT will take priority over MASQ but looking at the second screenshot, I can see that you have defined an SNAT policy for a specific host x.x.50.2. Create an SNAT policy with Any -> Any -> Internet' from {x.x.144.61}.

    Thanks,

    Sachin Gurung
    Team Lead | Sophos Technical Support
    Knowledge Base  |  @SophosSupport  |  Video tutorials
    Remember to like a post.  If a post (on a question thread) solves your question use the 'This helped me' link.

  • SNAT does take priority over masq, but that's clearly not his problem, Sachin.  He wants traffic from Internal to go out with the primary IP and traffic from that server to go out the additional address.  There's no other reason that the SNAT didn't grab the packets than that they were handled by the HTTP Proxy.  It's the whole difference between the server responding to requests and initiating requests itself.

    Cheers - Bob

     
    Sophos UTM Community Moderator
    Sophos Certified Architect - UTM
    Sophos Certified Engineer - XG
    Gold Solution Partner since 2005
    MediaSoft, Inc. USA
Reply
  • SNAT does take priority over masq, but that's clearly not his problem, Sachin.  He wants traffic from Internal to go out with the primary IP and traffic from that server to go out the additional address.  There's no other reason that the SNAT didn't grab the packets than that they were handled by the HTTP Proxy.  It's the whole difference between the server responding to requests and initiating requests itself.

    Cheers - Bob

     
    Sophos UTM Community Moderator
    Sophos Certified Architect - UTM
    Sophos Certified Engineer - XG
    Gold Solution Partner since 2005
    MediaSoft, Inc. USA
Children
No Data