XG to XG RED VPN With Multiple WAN interfaces

I guess, you cannot perform 4 tunnels, but 2. 

The point is, XG is using a Random Outbound IP, if not specify via CLI.

https://community.sophos.com/kb/en-us/122999

But this command relies on the destination.

So basically you cannot use it 4 times to bind it properly. 

Hi LuCar Toni,

Thanks by your response.

Well, I already suspected this, but I would like to confirm :)

I would be interesting has a option to bind it.

Best regards

Carlos

Lets wrap this topic up. 

I guess, there is no real "reason" to build up 4 tunnels. 

This is the standard scenario.

On AB you would say, Port1 is reachable with Interface A, PortB is reachable with Interface B. 

In Case of a Port not reachable.

Question is, what is happening with your DNS? Because the Tunnel A-1 Is not there anymore, you could force XG to build up the Tunnel between A-2 with a DNS record.

But : Would there be a real use case for this? Because you will have a drop in the "Performance" anyway. 

Lets wrap this topic up. 

I guess, there is no real "reason" to build up 4 tunnels. 

This is the standard scenario.

On AB you would say, Port1 is reachable with Interface A, PortB is reachable with Interface B. 

In Case of a Port not reachable.

Question is, what is happening with your DNS? Because the Tunnel A-1 Is not there anymore, you could force XG to build up the Tunnel between A-2 with a DNS record.

But : Would there be a real use case for this? Because you will have a drop in the "Performance" anyway. 

Hi LuCar, 

The reason to usage 4 tunnels is because I will usage OSPF to routing across these tunnels, I like Ipsec Bind option in Cyberoam OS.

With this I have total control about the path/routing/failover.

Currently I have several Cyberoam OS devices using this model with IPSEC, and I´m lokking solution to convert it to Sophos XG.

This is the reason :)

Best regards

Carlos

Any tip ? :)

Hi Carlos,

You can set up 4 independent RED tunnels. But, if you need to apply Link Load Balancing (not failover), it would be possible with the release SFOS v18. So I think we need to wait for Sophos' SD-WAN feature which will be enabled on version 18.

Cenk

Hi Cenk Tezdiyar tahnk yu by your feedback.

Weel, and how can I do the following as LuCar told

Head office Port WAN 1 ------------ Branch office Port Wan 1

Head office Port WAN 2 ------------ Branch office Port Wan 2

I tried setup firewall rules on Head office allowing the specific traffic comming Branch office port Wan 1 to Head office Port WAN 1 to portas 3400 tcp and 3410 udp, but it seeems there are a global rule that allowing it. 

I cannot control this traffic.

Any tip!?

Regards

Carlos

You have to build up two tunnels.

Tunnel1: XG A is Server, XG B Client. 

Tunnel2: XG a is Client, XG B is Server. 

https://community.sophos.com/kb/en-us/125101

Client will Always connect. So Basically XG waits on all Interfaces for a Port 3400 connection. 

You have to Control the Client Site, which interface should be used "outbound". 

The KBA has a small note:

• If the RED server firewall have more than one WAN interface, a sys-traffic-nat rule is necessary to force a correct NAT for the RED server firewall. This can be done in the XG Firewall's console.
  
  

https://community.sophos.com/kb/en-us/122999

This will more or less build up a redundancy in most scenario. 

Hi LuCar,

Thanks again by your great sugestion.

But sys-traffic-nat, or even static route does not work as expected with RED connections.

Even using sys-traffic-nat or static route on client side, the RED connect by other WAN interface (outbound interface).  The RED connections does not respect this.

Best regards

Carlos

I recently deployed this setup.

Can you post your sys-nat rule? What did you insert into this rule? 

Hi LuCar,

Sure....

On Client Side

sys-nat rule

Network interfaces

On Server Side

As you can see the remote Ip address online is the IP address from Interface port B

regards

CArlos

Hi folks.

Any tip!?  :)

Regards

Carlos

I assume 45. is your other XG? 

Your other XG has one or two Interfaces? 

Did you already verify via tcpdump, that this rule is not hitting / working?