Search Results

Search found 17 results on 1 pages for 'zywall'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • (Zywall USG 300) NAT bypassed when accessing in-house-server From LAN Via domain name

    - by mschr
    My situations is like this; i host a number of websites from within our joint network solution. On the network is basically 3 categories: the known public, registered via mac, given static dhcp lease the anonymous lan connections, given lease from specific dhcp range switches, unix hosts firewall Now, consider following hosts which are of interest 111.111.111.111 (Zywall USG 300 WAN) 192.168.1.1 (ZyWall USG 300 LAN) load balances and bw monitors plus handles NAT 192.168.1.2 (Linux www) serves mydomain1.tld and mydomain2.tld 192.168.123.123 (Random LAN client) accesses mydomain1.tld from LAN 23.234.12.253 (Random External client) accesses mydomain1.tld via WAN DNS A records are setup so that both mydomain1.tld and mydomain2.tld points to 111.111.111.111 - and the Linux www serves the http parts with VirtualHost configurations, setting up the document roots pr ServerName, this is not so interesting though.. NAT rule translates 111.111.111.111:80 to 192.168.1.2:80 (1:1 NAT) Our problem follows; When accessing http://mydomain1.tld from outside (23.234.12.253 example host) the joint network - everything is fine, zywall receives requests via port 80 and maps it to the linux host' httpd. However - once trying to go through the NAT from LAN side (in-house, 192.168.123.123 example host) then one gets filtered in the Zywall port 80 firewall. I know this only because port 443 is open for administration interface and https://mydomain1.tld prompts for zywall login. So my conclusion is, that the LAN that accesses 111.111.111.111 in fact are routed to 192.168.1.1 whilst bypassing the NAT table. I need to know how to setup NAT / Policy Route, so that LAN WAN LAN will function with proper network translations instead of doing the 'quick nameserver lookup' or whatever this might be.

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN slow with Firewall enabled on Zyxel ZyWall USG-100

    - by aleroot
    I have an OpenVPN server on a Linux machine, after installing a ZyWall USG-100 I'm experiencing extremely slowness navigating web servers on my remote LAN through the VPN connection, while accessing the web interface of the ZyWall is fast. I have configured everything : the Virtual Server for the OpenVPN Server, the static route as with the replaced router that I had before installing the ZyWall Today. I even added a rule to the firewall that allows connection to the OpenVPN Server machine : but navigation on the LAN through the VPN still slow, it seems that the Firewall is blocking packages, since if I disable the firewall on the USG-100 everything works fast as usual, while with the firewall enabled it is extremely slow. Why ? Do I need to add some other rule to the firewall to speed up ?

    Read the article

  • IPSec VPN using ZyWALL IPSec VPN Client: unable to connect from some providers

    - by Reshi
    I'm trying to configure an IPSec VPN to one company from my home. The company has SANET internet service provider. I was able to create a VPN connection from another company that has the same internet service provider. The problem begins when I'm trying to connect from another ISP like Orange or Telekom. Here is the log from ZyWall: 20120816 10:06:18:359 Default (SA Gateway-P1) SEND phase 1 Main Mode [SA] [VID] [VID] [VID] [VID] [VID] 20120816 10:06:18:375 Default (SA Gateway-P1) RECV phase 1 Main Mode [SA] [VID] [VID] [VID] [VID] [VID] [VID] [VID] [VID] 20120816 10:06:18:390 Default (SA Gateway-P1) SEND phase 1 Main Mode [KEY_EXCH] [NONCE] [NAT_D] [NAT_D] 20120816 10:06:18:718 Default (SA Gateway-P1) RECV phase 1 Main Mode [KEY_EXCH] [NONCE] [NAT_D] [NAT_D] 20120816 10:06:18:734 Default (SA Gateway-P1) SEND phase 1 Main Mode [HASH] [ID] 20120816 10:06:18:750 Default (SA Gateway-P1) RECV phase 1 Main Mode [HASH] [ID] 20120816 10:06:18:750 Default phase 1 done: initiator id [email protected], responder id 111.112.113.114 20120816 10:06:18:765 Default (SA Gateway-Tunnel-P2) SEND phase 2 Quick Mode [HASH] [SA] [KEY_EXCH] [NONCE] [ID] [ID] 20120816 10:06:18:953 Default (SA Gateway-Tunnel-P2) RECV phase 2 Quick Mode [HASH] [SA] [KEY_EXCH] [NONCE] [ID] [ID] 20120816 10:06:18:953 Default (SA Gateway-Tunnel-P2) SEND phase 2 Quick Mode [HASH] 20120816 10:06:48:968 Default (SA Gateway-P1) SEND Informational [HASH] [NOTIFY] type DPD_R_U_THERE 20120816 10:06:48:984 Default (SA Gateway-P1) RECV Informational [HASH] [NOTIFY] type DPD_R_U_THERE_ACK ZyWall informs me that the tunnel was opened. But I can't ping or access any computer in the network. My configuration at home: ISP: Orange Optical connection Terminal: GPON OPTICAL NETWORK TERMINAL G-25E Router: TPLink TL-WR941N --> SPI Firewall Enabled --> VPN - IPSEC Passthrough Enabled I was wondering if the problem could not be on ISP side (that he blocks somehow this connection because in SANET ISP it worked fine) or even in my terminal or router. What could I check? Where could be the problem ?

    Read the article

  • VPN using Zywall

    - by Rune FS
    I've played around with a certificate based VPN (normally I don't do hardware) we've manged to setup the connection and the tunnel between the routers is working correctly. We now need the last step. There's no connection to the computers on the other end. What could we have forgotten? (we're testing with two standard configured Win7 machines) EDIT: Just to clarify the tunnel is working I can ping the router on the other end. I can't access the computers on the other side of that router and vice versa. (It's also possible to access the remotemangement console of the remote router on the LAN IP)

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 Active Directory DNS setup

    - by Mister IT Guru
    I have to setup a small windows network inside my bigger linux/mac infrastructure. In order to get the windows clients logging onto the domain, I have had to make the DC their primary DNS server, which seems to have worked. I would much prefer to have one DNS server running on my network, or at least one authoritative server running on the network. I have a USG 200 router/firewall and I can configure some static records for DNS, but I an not sure what I need to put in order to get DNS and AD working together, and hints and tips appreciated.

    Read the article

  • "Unable to open MRTG log file" error with nagios and mrtg

    - by Simone Magnaschi
    We have a strange issue with our setup of icinga / nagios and mrtg. Icinga is working great and has no problem, it can monitor basically everything without issues. We setup mrtg to gather bandwith data from our routers and switches. MRTG is working fine: it stores the log data in the /var/www/mrtg/ directory and displays the graph data via web. We assume so MRTG is doing great. We tried to setup bandwidth checks in nagios: define service{ use generic-service ; Inherit values from a template host_name zywall-agora service_description ZYWALL AGORA TRAFFICO check_command check_local_mrtgtraf!/var/www/mrtg/x.x.x.x_2.log!AVG!1000000,2000000!5000000,5000000!1000 check_interval 1 ; Check the service every 1 minute under normal conditions retry_interval 1 ; Re-check every minute until its final/hard state is determined } Where /var/www/mrtg/x.x.x.x_2.log is the correct log path file. We keep on getting Unable to open MRTG log file error in the test result in icinga web interface. We tried everything: give ownership to user nagios or icinga to the log file give chmod 777 to the file try to copy the file in another directory and give it full permission Same error. The strange thing is that if we use the command that nagios generate in a bash session the command works like a charm: /usr/lib64/nagios/plugins/check_mrtgtraf -F /var/www/mrtg/x.x.x.x_2.log -a AVG -w 10,20 -c 5000000,5000000 -e 10 Result: Traffic WARNING - Avg. In = 17.9 KB/s, Avg. Out = 5.0 KB/s|in=17.877930KB/s;10.000000;5000000.000000;0.000000 out=5.000000KB/s;20.000000;5000000.000000;0.000000 We ran that command line as root, as user nagios and as user icinga and all three worked ok. We thought that the command that nagios perform maybe has something wrong in it, so we debugged nagios but we found out that the generated command from nagios is the same as above. Searching on google for these kind of problem returns only issues of systems where mrtg is not installed or issues with the wrong path to the log file, but these seems not to be our case. We are stuck, can somebody help?

    Read the article

  • Assistance on setup to Connect an offsite server to the LAN via RRAS VPN - Server 2008 R2

    - by Paul D'Ambra
    I have an office LAN protected using a Zyxel Zywall USG 300. I've set up an L2TP/ipsec VPN on that which accepts connections using a shared secret and I've tested this from multiple clients. I have a server offsite and want to set up RRAS to use a persistent connection to the VPN so that it can carry out network jobs even with no one logged in (I'm using it for Micorosft DPM secondary backup). If I create a vpn as if I were setting up a users laptop it can dial in no problem but if I set up a demand dial interface in RRAS it errors. I enable RRAS ticking only demand dial interface (branch office routing) Select network interfaces, right click and choose new demand dial interface Name the VPN ToCompany Select connect using VPN And then L2TP as the vpn type enter the IP address (double-checked for typos!) select Route IP packets on this interface specify static route to remote network as 10.0.0.0/24 with metric of 1 add dial out credentials (again double checked for typos and confirmed with other vpn connections click finish now I right-click on the new interface and choose properties and then the security tab I change Data encryption to optional select only PAP for Authentication (both as per manufacturer of Zywall) click advanced settings against type of vpn and set shared secret then I select the new interface, right-click and choose connect this dials and then errors with either 720 or 811 as the error codes. However, if I create a VPN by going to Network & Sharing center and setting up as if I was creating a VPN from my laptop to the office (say) it dials successfully so I know the VPN settings are correct and the machine can connect to the VPN. Suggests very strongly the problem is how I'm setting up RRAS. Can anyone help?

    Read the article

  • DNS lookups failing somewhere between firewall and router

    - by TessellatingHeckler
    we have a setup of ADSL line - Cisco 837 ADSL router - Zyxel ZyWall 35 firewall/NAT - Switch == Intel load balanced NICS in a server. It has been fine for years, suddenly DNS resolution stopped working on the server. No changes that I know of, so I can't work backwards from there. It was configured with the ISP's DNS servers, neither network device does DNS relaying. Wireshark shows the request go out but nothing comes back. The server networking stack seems OK though, because if we query an internal DNS server on a remote site, that works. I can logon to the Cisco, and DNS resolves OK from the command line. I can logon to the ZyWall, and DNS does not resolve from the command line. So the problem seems to be the firewall, patch cable or router, yes? On the router: interface Ethernet0 ip address aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd 255.255.255.ddd ip tcp adjust-mss 1450 hold-queue 100 out On the firewall: DNS server set to 8.8.8.8 (Google's), DNS traffic allowed LAN-WAN. What else should I look for? Update: Following This guide I've got traffic logging on the Cisco. I have also got access to a public DNS server which I can run tcpdump on to see things from the other side. And as per the below comments, I've tested with Dig and see that DNS over TCP works, and over UDP does not. Currently: DNS request from the server using TCP shows up in the firewall log, and in the Cisco log, and in tcpdump on the DNS server, the answer comes back, it works fine. DNS request from the server using UDP shows up in the firewall log, and in the Cisco log, does NOT show in tcpdump on the DNS server, times out. DNS request from the cisco (using UDP) does show up in tcpdump on the DNS server, answer received, works fine. Ping requests from the server and the cisco to the DNS server show up in tcpdump on the DNS server. DNS request from the server using UDP does show up on the firewall. Summary: TCP seems fine throughought. UDP works over the ADSL and to the Cisco, and it works from the server to the Cisco, but it doesn't cross the Cisco properly, it seems. I did see the Cisco showing as connected at 10Mb/full-duplex internally, and the firewall showing as 100Mb/full-duplex externally. I have forced the firewall to 10Mb and rebooted both devices. That seemed to help get UDP traffic (server-firewall-cisco) instead of (server-firewall), but did not fix it. Update: Sanitized Cisco config: version 12.2 no service pad service timestamps debug datetime msec service timestamps log datetime msec service password-encryption ! hostname cisco ! logging queue-limit 100 enable secret 5 {password} enable password 7 {password} ! ip subnet-zero ip domain name example.org ip name-server {nameserver_IP} ! ! ip audit notify log ip audit po max-events 100 no ftp-server write-enable ! interface Ethernet0 ip address {Inside_public_IP} 255.255.255.248 ip tcp adjust-mss 1460 hold-queue 100 out ! interface ATM0 no ip address no atm ilmi-keepalive pvc 0/38 encapsulation aal5mux ppp dialer dialer pool-member 1 ! dsl operating-mode auto ! interface Dialer1 ip unnumbered Ethernet0 encapsulation ppp dialer pool 1 dialer idle-timeout 0 dialer persistent no cdp enable ppp chap hostname {ADSL_Username} ppp chap password 7 {ADSL_Password} ! ip classless ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Dialer1 no ip http server no ip http secure-server ! access-list 23 permit {IP} dialer-list 1 protocol ip permit no cdp run snmp-server enable traps tty ! {con, vty} end

    Read the article

  • setup Zyxel USG 20W as L2TP VPN Server

    - by Massimo
    I've a Zywall USG 20W (wireless disabled) behind a router supplied by the ISP. All ports (both TCP and UDP) on the ISP router are forwarded to the 20W. I'm trying to configure an L2TP VPN to be used by Windows Xp / 7 with Microsoft native client. This was working before with a different firewall, so I'm pretty sure that all the required packets are flowing to the 20W. I followed a tutorial from the italian Zyxel Website, but I cannot get the VPN to work. Always cannot pass phase 2, and I see the following on the log: [ID]: Tunnel [Default_L2TP_VPN_Connection] Phase 2 local policy mismatch Phase 1 goes fine. In Windows the error is always 788. This happens regardless the proposals I set in the phase 1 and 2 setting. What should I check ? Is there any way to get more detailed diagnostic info (policy mismatch is too generic) ? Thanks a lot to whom may help. Massimo.

    Read the article

  • XCA: sign IPsec certificates with own CA

    - by sbrattla
    I'm trying to establish a LAN to LAN connection through a VPN tunnel. There's a Zywall at the remote office which will be responsible for establishing a connection to a Draytek at the main office. I'm able to establish the connection if I use shared keys, but I'd like to use certificates instead. I've downloaded the XCA application for Ubuntu which allows me to first create a CA certificate, and then sign "certificate signing reqests" using this CA. However, I'm uncertain if I am doing things right. More specifically<, which basic keys/extended keys should the CA certificate and the certificates themselves have? Right now I just skip selecting any keys at all, but is that right? All hints and help appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Setting up routing for MS DirectAccess to a VMWare EsXi Host

    - by Paul D'Ambra
    I'm trying to set up DirectAccess on a virtual machine so I can demonstrate it's value and then if need be add a physical machine to host it. I'm hitting a problem because the Direct Access machine (DA01) needs to have 2 public addresses actually configured on the external adapter but there is a Zyxel Zywall USG300 between the VMware ESXi host and the outside world. I've summarised my setup in this diagram If I ping from the LAN to 212.x.y.89 I get a response but if I ping from the VM I get destination host unreachable. I used "route add 212.x.y.89 192.c.d.1" and get request timed out. At that point I see outbound traffic allowed on the Zyxel firewall but nothing coming back. I'm past my understanding of routing and VMWare so am not sure how to tie down where my problem lies (or even if this setup is possible). So any help massively appreciated. Paul

    Read the article

  • Advice on new hardware firewall for a small company server-environment

    - by Mestika
    Hi everyone, My companies currently hardware firewall (an old ZyXEL ZyWALL firewall) and is indeed requiring an update to a new firewall. It is a small company with a similar small server-environment, so the need for a huge, complex and expensive solution isn’t there but a more “straight-forward” firewall, that can provide the necessary security to our systems and block unwanted elements from the core server and only accept access through our one server which is used as an “gateway” between the Internet and our internal network. I haven’t that much experience with hardware firewalls so I’m requesting any good advice and/or knowledge on which products will be suited for our specific need. If you need more information about the specific needs we require, please let me know and I’ll provide them to you. Sincerely - Mestika

    Read the article

  • Cisco 837 not passing UDP traffic properly (was: DNS query problem)

    - by TessellatingHeckler
    We have a setup of ADSL line - Cisco 837 ADSL router - Zyxel ZyWall 35 firewall/NAT - Switch - LAN. It has been fine for years, suddenly DNS resolution stopped working from the LAN to public DNS servers. No changes that I know of, so I can't revert anything. Current behaviour: DNS requests from the LAN using TCP show up in the oubound firewall log, in the Cisco debug log, in the dns-server-firewall, in tcpdump on the DNS server, the answer comes back, it works fine. DNS requests from the LAN using UDP show up in the outbound firewall log, in the Cisco debug log, but does NOT show in the dns-server-firewall, not in tcpdump on the DNS server, times out. DNS requests from the Cisco using UDP show up in the dns-server-firewall and in tcpdump on the DNS server, answer received, works fine. netcat connections to port 53 or a random port by TCP show up in the dns-server-firewall netcat connections to port 53 or a random port by UDP do not show up in the dns-server-firewall Summary: TCP seems fine throughought. UDP works from the Cisco over the ADSL, and it works from the LAN to the Cisco, but it doesn't seem to cross the Cisco 837 properly. Update: confirmed with netcat that any UDP traffic from the LAN is affected, not just traffic to port 53. Update: If I change the firewall's external IP to any other IP in the subnet, this starts working. When I put it back, it stops working. I now suspect it's an ISP issue (does that sound plausible?), and am removing the Cisco config.

    Read the article

  • Wifi Drops Connections with WPA2-PSK

    - by graf_ignotiev
    I run a small computer lab made up of 10 computers of identical hardware and software (Dell Latitudes with Windows 7 x64 Enterprise) and I use a ZyWALL 2WG as a router/firewall. Nine of the computers connect to the router over wifi using WPA2-PSK encryption while the last one is connected by ethernet cable. I'm having a problem where any computer connected to the wi-fi occasionally drops off the network (it cannot be pinged and the client cannot ping the gateway). It only happens on the wifi side and only when the encryption is WPA2-PSK or WPA-PSK. I tried using another router with a different make and model and had no problems. Thinking it could be a software error, I reset the router to factory defaults and installed the newest firmware (V4.04(AQI.8) | 04/09/2010), but still have the problem. The 802.1X log gives the following error User logout because of user disassociation. with this note WPA2-PSK:00242c582ece:logout where 00242c582ece is the mac address of the device. At this point I'm out of things to try and leads to follow. It looks like this user had the same or similar problem, but none of those proposed solutions work for me.

    Read the article

  • Network Explorer Intermittently Fails to Display all Computers in Work Group

    - by graf_ignotiev
    I run a small computer lab of 10 computers and occasionally, when using the network explorer (a.k.a Network Browser) some or all of the remote computers will fail to appear. If I try to access a remote computer by its name I get an unspecified error (code 0x80004005), but I am still able to access it with the computer's IP address. The strangest part is that the problem will inexplicably go away after waiting awhile. Each computer is running Windows 7 x64 Enterprise and has identical hardware, software and configuration. They are all on the same subnet and in the same workgroup. I've spent days researching the problem and have tried the following solutions: Updated the BIOS, chipset and network adapter drivers Changed Power Settings in Network Adapter Properties so that the computer will not turn it off Disabled the Computer Browser service Changed the DHCP node type to broadcast Reviewed the Event Viewer logs Steps 3 and 4 have seemed to help the problem a little bit, but not completely. I'm beginning to suspect that the problem might lie with our router which is a ZyXEL ZyWALL 2WG, as the packets sent by Network Discovery may not be returning in time, but I wanted to get some perspective in the issue before I went any further.

    Read the article

  • Choosing gateway router/firewall for small datacenter network [closed]

    - by rvs
    I'm choosing a gateway router/firewall for small internal network for medium-sized web service. Currently there are 5 servers in internal network, up to 50 http(s) requests/second, up to 1000 simultaneous connections, uplink is 100 Mbit. So, network is relatively small and not very busy and we don't like to buy some pricey monster like cisco or jupiper for this site. Instead we'd like to buy two affordable devices (one for spare), which can handle our workload now and some time in future (it might be up to 2x more in 1 year). I had some experience with Sonicwall NSA, but it seems to be too complex for this site (we don't need most of its features) and even too pricey when buying two of them. So, after some research I've come up with following options: Netgear Prosecure UTM Series (probably UTM25) Zyxel ZyWall Series (USG100 or USG200) Sonicwall TZ 210 Is this a good idea? All of the above seems to be more office products, not datacenter ones. Or we should stick with Sonicwall NSA? Does anyone have any hands-on experience with this models? Maybe some other advices? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu + SSL ports + AVAST

    - by jurajvt
    I have an interesting problem with communication via standard SSL ports. Fresh installed Ubuntu 14.04 server + Postfix + Dovecot, SASL authentication provided by Dovecot, self-signed certificate generated trough the Dovecot script mkcert.sh. Redirected ports on ZyWALL USG 200. I can send and receive e-mails from outside with standard ports 25 and 110, but not over 587. I am connecting to my server from machine with Windows 8.1 + VMWare Player + Ubuntu 14.04 Desktop + ssh. On Windows host I have installed Avast! antivirus. When I am trying to telnet from virtual machine to server over 587, it refused connection. But when I turn on Avast! it let me in to message Connected to... Same with nmap. When Avast! is turned on it is show me all SSL ports. When I turned it off, only standard ports appeared. OpenSSL shows me CONNECTED(00000003). But outside virtual machine directly in Windows 8.1 using nmap with zenmap there are not opened SSL ports in both Avast! states. From other external linux machines are problems with touching SSL ports same - refused. I have turned on submission in master.cf and 587 port is correctly listening on 0.0.0.0 in process master.pid which belongs to Postfix. I can telnet, or nmap over port 587 to my domain directly from server. Other ports like 995, 993 are OK on localhost, too. It is true, that I can't send emails via 587 anyway (Avast! turned on/off), but I can see ports opened. It is possible, that I have simply bad certificate and Avast! has right one, so with turned it on I can see opened ports? EDIT: To be more clear, I can't see or using port 587 everywhere from outside (tried Thunderbird, telnet, openssl, nmap, putty, swaks; both from Linux or Windows machines) and that is my problem. It was only by chance that I saw opened ports when Avast! is turned on.

    Read the article

1