https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/global-protect-behind-azure-load-balancer-without-nat/m-p/366420#M1064 <P>OK now I changed the outbound rule</P><P><SPAN>Outbound and inbound use the same IP. SNAT port exhaustion may occur</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Now it works question is what is the logic behind this.</SPAN></P> Tue, 01 Dec 2020 09:07:10 GMT Retired Member 2020-12-01T09:07:10Z https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/global-protect-behind-azure-load-balancer-without-nat/m-p/366407#M1063 <P>I have a PAYG VM-300 behind an Azure standard SKU load balancer with NSG opened up. I used this first to test the management interface and could load balance this. However when I try this on the Global protect it fails.&nbsp;</P><P>I have a default virtual router with a static route 0.0.0.0/0 to .1 from untrusted and a rule to 168.63.129.16/32 also to .1 from untrusted subnet. With a NAT rule it works immidiatly. Without it fails.</P> Tue, 01 Dec 2020 09:00:56 GMT https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/global-protect-behind-azure-load-balancer-without-nat/m-p/366407#M1063 Retired Member 2020-12-01T09:00:56Z https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/global-protect-behind-azure-load-balancer-without-nat/m-p/366420#M1064 <P>OK now I changed the outbound rule</P><P><SPAN>Outbound and inbound use the same IP. SNAT port exhaustion may occur</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Now it works question is what is the logic behind this.</SPAN></P> Tue, 01 Dec 2020 09:07:10 GMT https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/global-protect-behind-azure-load-balancer-without-nat/m-p/366420#M1064 Retired Member 2020-12-01T09:07:10Z