Guest User!

You are not Sophos Staff.

This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

WAN to LAN Inbound NAT - How To?

I just recently installed the Sophos XG platform, coming from a UTM 9 firewall.  Question is, how do I create an inbound NAT to forward HTTPS (tcp 443) to an internal web server?  I've played around with the policy settings and cannot seem to figure out the proper way to set this up.   Any help?



This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • Ditto. Need to setup up forwarding for my Slingbox on port 5001. Been screwing with this for 3 hours and I can't make it work. I need someone to tell me what info goes where in the setup, and why, or I'll never understand this to do the other things I need to setup (and my wife will kill me).

    IP of the Slingbox is 172.16.1.15, port 5001.
    WAN is DHCP

    Needs to be available from the Internet or it'll never work.
  • I just finished doing something completely counter-intuitive, and it seems to work now. Starting from the top, I create a Business Non-Http Rule:

    Rule name: Slingbox
    Source host: the slingbox by IPv4 address, host group Inside Lan (I created that), IPv4, and the slingbox again in that group.
    Hosted Address: Port2 which is my RED WAN Port and IP Address

    Protected Zone: WAN
    Protected App Server: Slingbox again
    Forward All Ports: Off

    Port Forward Protocol: TCP
    External Port Type: Port Range
    External Port Range: 1-65534
    Mapped Port Type: Port
    Mapped Port: 5003 (in my case, may differ for others, usually 5001)

    Routing; Rewrite Source Address: ON
    Use Outbound Address: NAT policy for the Slingbox host (I named it SlingNAT, but whatever)

    Rule Based User Identity thing: Off

    Intrusion Prevention: WAN to LAN
    Traffic Shaping: None (will likely change in the future to handle overuse)

    Log Firewall Traffic: Yes (in an attempt to try and see what is wrong if it doesn't work, which I never can)

    Create Reflexive Rule: Yes (sets up a reverse rule so traffic can get out/back out)

    Heartbeat stuff: Off



    No clue how or why this works. Like I said it seems entirely counter intuitive. I've got other NAT type stuff to setup for a couple other things and if I end up having any trouble with those, I'm just switching back to the UTM as I had zero issues with that. AND with UTM I could at least seem that protection was running and doing stuff. This XG thing is just a complete pain in the rear to navigate, and I still can't tell if it is actually doing anything more than just giving me a migraine.
Reply
  • I just finished doing something completely counter-intuitive, and it seems to work now. Starting from the top, I create a Business Non-Http Rule:

    Rule name: Slingbox
    Source host: the slingbox by IPv4 address, host group Inside Lan (I created that), IPv4, and the slingbox again in that group.
    Hosted Address: Port2 which is my RED WAN Port and IP Address

    Protected Zone: WAN
    Protected App Server: Slingbox again
    Forward All Ports: Off

    Port Forward Protocol: TCP
    External Port Type: Port Range
    External Port Range: 1-65534
    Mapped Port Type: Port
    Mapped Port: 5003 (in my case, may differ for others, usually 5001)

    Routing; Rewrite Source Address: ON
    Use Outbound Address: NAT policy for the Slingbox host (I named it SlingNAT, but whatever)

    Rule Based User Identity thing: Off

    Intrusion Prevention: WAN to LAN
    Traffic Shaping: None (will likely change in the future to handle overuse)

    Log Firewall Traffic: Yes (in an attempt to try and see what is wrong if it doesn't work, which I never can)

    Create Reflexive Rule: Yes (sets up a reverse rule so traffic can get out/back out)

    Heartbeat stuff: Off



    No clue how or why this works. Like I said it seems entirely counter intuitive. I've got other NAT type stuff to setup for a couple other things and if I end up having any trouble with those, I'm just switching back to the UTM as I had zero issues with that. AND with UTM I could at least seem that protection was running and doing stuff. This XG thing is just a complete pain in the rear to navigate, and I still can't tell if it is actually doing anything more than just giving me a migraine.
Children
No Data