dynamic dns issue

How did you resolve this on UTM? 

What do you mean?

Quick reply..Did it

Nope as a first try it is not working.. Both FQDNs forward to port 80 of the server. Did it actually work for you in your tests?

However as a workaround I had created some NAT rules that might interfere (?) Those two are the two first ones, though..

I will try more and perhaps later do as I mentioned above and try to create a new post to explain what I need to do and ask if it is doable... If you have any other ideas, they are welcome!

I really appreciate your help!

DNAT will grap the traffic of the WAF. 

OK, so it will interfere..BUT I disabled all related NAT rules and I still get the same result... 

Then it seems not to be supported on SFOS. 

Nevertheless I will try my luck getting an "official" answer (from the support maybe?)

I will create a detailed post to describe the situation and see what I get. I really can't believe that it is not working. It was a piece of cake with the UTM...

I really feel at this point that my decision to drop it and go to XG has dropped me a few steps backwards..

I will admit, though, that working with web policies is much better in XG.. now, detailed reporting, live internet usage and other staff that are missing from XG is a different discussion, but about those I knew and expect to be added/improved  in the future..

Sophos Support is not involved for Home User. 

For the future, such concepts are ZTNA concepts. But this is not available for Home users. 

Yes I understand I am a home user, but I don't want them to "support" me.. Just an answer whether this can be done or not..

LuCar Toni said:

For the future, such concepts are ZTNA concepts.

What do you mean?

www.sophos.com/.../zero-trust-network-access

Thanks for the link.. makes sense I guess..

I figured you were referring to zero trust na, but thought it was irrelevant to my case, so I thought perhaps you were referring to something else after all.

Because I didn't know that sophos has ztna as an additional "module ".

Business wise it makes sense I guess with the covid situation and remote workers everywhere. 

Thanks again. I will still create a post about this in order to perhaps get a definite answer. Even a plan for a future release enhancements will be a good outcome..

This fact finally helped me to get to the bottom of this...

LuCar Toni said:

DNAT will grap the traffic of the WAF. 

I was focusing on motion and pyload dnat rules which I disabled and it was still not working and specifically was always redirecting to the server's 80 port. 

This is what was weird. And I thought that since I have no rule for http, this should not be possible... I looked again carefully and  lo and behold, I did have a dnat rule for http which I had forgotten about 

Disabled the rule, created again all WAF rules and what do you know... all is working as they should..

So the issue was - surprise-surprise - PEBKAC ...

I can't streess enough how much I appreciate your help on this. If you hadn't insisted and also made clear that DNAT takes precedence over WAF, I would have thought that it is not working after all.

Thanks a lot and have a nice weekend!

P.S.: I hope in future versions they add a search function in the rules because you have to be really careful to find something. I could have done it using filters I guess,(perhaps not..) but a search function to quickly find something will be a great addition to the UI 

This fact finally helped me to get to the bottom of this...

LuCar Toni said:

DNAT will grap the traffic of the WAF. 

I was focusing on motion and pyload dnat rules which I disabled and it was still not working and specifically was always redirecting to the server's 80 port. 

This is what was weird. And I thought that since I have no rule for http, this should not be possible... I looked again carefully and  lo and behold, I did have a dnat rule for http which I had forgotten about 

Disabled the rule, created again all WAF rules and what do you know... all is working as they should..

So the issue was - surprise-surprise - PEBKAC ...

I can't streess enough how much I appreciate your help on this. If you hadn't insisted and also made clear that DNAT takes precedence over WAF, I would have thought that it is not working after all.

Thanks a lot and have a nice weekend!

P.S.: I hope in future versions they add a search function in the rules because you have to be really careful to find something. I could have done it using filters I guess,(perhaps not..) but a search function to quickly find something will be a great addition to the UI