I checkedpoint migration and found that the security rule contained an invalid address object.
object address was missing or wrong object address was contained.
Is this a bug?
Is there a case that has experienced the same problem as me?
was the invalid address object flagged to be reviewed under the 'MONITOR' tab in your Expedition project? After importing a config file to be migrated, the monitor page lists messages for migrated configurations that need further review.
The Monitor tab content is fine.
Rule Migration is somewhat different from the actual rule used.
The address object used in the rule is slightly different from the address object in the actual rule.
It migrated almost exactly, but there was a very slight error.
I want to know if this is a bug.
can you send your checkpoint configuration along with a note about which address you think was not migrated correctly to the email: fwmigrate @ paloaltonetworks.com
understood that you cannot share the file.
Can you copy the snippet from the configuraiton that resulted in the address objects migrated invalid, but change the values (names, IP addresses, and any other identifiable information)?
Click Accept as Solution to acknowledge that the answer to your question has been provided.
The button appears next to the replies on topics you’ve started. The member who gave the solution and all future visitors to this topic will appreciate it!
These simple actions take just seconds of your time, but go a long way in showing appreciation for community members and the Live Community as a whole!
The Live Community thanks you for your participation!