I'm having issue with configuring NATing for my Polycom unit sitting behind the firewall to work. I have allowed all the required apps for Polycom to allow outgoing and incoming. My issue is when I can only call out to another party with public IP but can't receive call from outside the network. I have both NAT rule for both ways in place. Any one have experience with similar setup?
Are you running PAN-OS version 3.1.0 as 3.1.0 has enhancements for ALG in a NAT'ed environment? Please check out the release notes for version 3.1.0 and give 3.1.0 a try.
So our PA is on version 3.1.3-h1 now and still having issue with NATing for Polycom. We were close on being able to get our PA to make and receive call to the external network. However, when calling internally, our NATed Polycom called the internal system with its public IP instead eventhough it was an internal IP call.
I have the same issue.
Our PAN runs PANOS 3.1.5 and protects a Tandberg MCU4250.
MCU has a private address (192.168.x.y) and I can ping it from Internet through the PAN with its public address (195.101.x.y).
But when I try to establish a videoconference, it fail.
During the process, the first TCP session connects correctly, client and MCU discuss and negotiate dynamic parameters. PAN correctly detects the h323 application.
But in the second (dynamic) TCP connection, I notice that the client try to establish a connection to the private address. The PAN does not modify the h323 payload.
The filter rule accepts following applications (from untrust to trust) from any to 195.101.x.y : h.245 h.323 rtcp rtp icmp rsvp
The NAT rule simply "nats" statically (from untrust to trust) any->195.101.x.y to any->192.168.x.y.
Did I miss a parameter or a trick ?
Try creating your NAT rule by making your source and destination zone from "untrust" to "untrust".
Then create an security policy from untrust to trust, any any any -any application-, any, Action Deny policy. This will log all your denied traffic and possibly from there we can indentify what application you may be missing, and add that to your rule.
It didn't work...
I also tried to change the NAT rule to :
Original packet :
any to trust, 192.168.* to any,
Translated packet :
195.101.* (static-ip, bidirectional) to none
The payload of the h323 packet wasn't change...
For the second dynamic connection, the client on the Internet, tries to connect to the private address.
For NATing H323 flow, is there a "priority" in the NAT rules ?
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!