<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Problem with PBF with two ISP and two VR in Next-Generation Firewall Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/problem-with-pbf-with-two-isp-and-two-vr/m-p/509926#M239</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi all,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I have a PA220 managed with Panorama. Very cool mgmt and very powerful. Only the PA220 is a bit slow.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;My Situation -&amp;nbsp;I have two internet connections (Eth 1/1 and 1/7) with fixed IP. Both have their own VR and therefore both have a null route. And both have own untrust1 and untrust2 zone.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;All my clients 10.10.10.x/24 are in trust1 zone and can connect by vr1 to www. Now I will set some clients by a PBF Rule to go all www traffic forward to eth 1/7 and next hop the public IP from eth1/7.&lt;BR /&gt;It doesn't want to work the way I think it should. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;In the traffic monitor I see the traffic that is also allowed. Zones are also allowed access, which fits. I have a suspicion that something is not working with the return route.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;In vr2 I have already set a route that when it goes to network 10.10.10.x/24 it should go to the next VR1.&lt;BR /&gt;But that doesn't help either.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Anyone have an idea what it could be?&lt;BR /&gt;Have worked like this&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/pan-os/10-1/pan-os-admin/policy/policy-based-forwarding/use-case-pbf-for-outbound-access-with-dual-isps#id1e130c06-0775-45d9-9f96-c416531fdb5f" target="_blank"&gt;https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/pan-os/10-1/pan-os-admin/policy/policy-based-forwarding/use-case-pbf-for-outbound-access-with-dual-isps#id1e130c06-0775-45d9-9f96-c416531fdb5f&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;but there same routers are used.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2022 15:30:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>clonesheep</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2022-07-26T15:30:06Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Problem with PBF with two ISP and two VR</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/problem-with-pbf-with-two-isp-and-two-vr/m-p/509926#M239</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi all,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I have a PA220 managed with Panorama. Very cool mgmt and very powerful. Only the PA220 is a bit slow.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;My Situation -&amp;nbsp;I have two internet connections (Eth 1/1 and 1/7) with fixed IP. Both have their own VR and therefore both have a null route. And both have own untrust1 and untrust2 zone.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;All my clients 10.10.10.x/24 are in trust1 zone and can connect by vr1 to www. Now I will set some clients by a PBF Rule to go all www traffic forward to eth 1/7 and next hop the public IP from eth1/7.&lt;BR /&gt;It doesn't want to work the way I think it should. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;In the traffic monitor I see the traffic that is also allowed. Zones are also allowed access, which fits. I have a suspicion that something is not working with the return route.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;In vr2 I have already set a route that when it goes to network 10.10.10.x/24 it should go to the next VR1.&lt;BR /&gt;But that doesn't help either.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Anyone have an idea what it could be?&lt;BR /&gt;Have worked like this&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/pan-os/10-1/pan-os-admin/policy/policy-based-forwarding/use-case-pbf-for-outbound-access-with-dual-isps#id1e130c06-0775-45d9-9f96-c416531fdb5f" target="_blank"&gt;https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/pan-os/10-1/pan-os-admin/policy/policy-based-forwarding/use-case-pbf-for-outbound-access-with-dual-isps#id1e130c06-0775-45d9-9f96-c416531fdb5f&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;but there same routers are used.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2022 15:30:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/problem-with-pbf-with-two-isp-and-two-vr/m-p/509926#M239</guid>
      <dc:creator>clonesheep</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-07-26T15:30:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Problem with PBF with two ISP and two VR</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/problem-with-pbf-with-two-isp-and-two-vr/m-p/510138#M244</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/43193"&gt;@clonesheep&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Can you check &lt;STRONG&gt;Symmetric Return&lt;/STRONG&gt; settings on the router?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Select&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;Enforce Symmetric Return&lt;LI-WRAPPER&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;to ensure that return traffic from the Corporate zone to the internet is forwarded out on the same interface through which traffic ingressed from the internet.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/LI-WRAPPER&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/pan-os/9-1/pan-os-admin/policy/policy-based-forwarding/use-case-pbf-for-outbound-access-with-dual-isps" target="_self"&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Ref article.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2022 05:27:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/problem-with-pbf-with-two-isp-and-two-vr/m-p/510138#M244</guid>
      <dc:creator>SutareMayur</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-07-28T05:27:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

