Yes. However, in all my previous 9.x versions the FW tab and NAT tab had their own set of sequenced numbers (FW#1, FW#2, etc. then NAT#1, NAT#2, etc.). In my current version, rule #1 starts under the NAT tab and continues the sequence through the FW tab (NAT#1, NAT#2, NAT#3, FW#4, FW#5, FW#6). Just a bit annoying since I had most of my rules memorized by number. Although, it does kind of make a bit more sense since now the NAT automatic FW rule is accounted for in the numbering sequence.
That is not correct. The nat rules have their own sequence eg I have two masq and 4 dnat rules. The dnat rules are 1 to 4, the firewall rules associated are 1 to 3. All dnat rules have auto packet filter ticked.
That is not correct. The nat rules have their own sequence eg I have two masq and 4 dnat rules. The dnat rules are 1 to 4, the firewall rules associated are 1 to 3. All dnat rules have auto packet filter ticked.
Ian
Well what I described is the way it is (for my UTM) after upgrading to 9.202-33.[8-)]
In my case, the way the rules are numbered changed, but in the logging, it still uses the old numbers, in the new case, rule 12(in the WebAdmin), logs as rule 10(in the logs), having 2 automatic rules.
In my case, the way the rules are numbered changed, but in the logging, it still uses the old numbers, in the new case, rule 12(in the WebAdmin), logs as rule 10(in the logs), having 2 automatic rules.
Same here with 9.203-3. the firewall rule number in the logs are different to the rule numbers in WebAdmin. Automatic firewall rules 1-4, user rule e.g. 20, but in the logs the user role 20 is log rule #16
I also am seeing this same behavior on my system... Firewall rules are numbered 7 thru 18 but in the live log they are referenced as numbers 1 thru 12 which makes it difficult to troubleshoot as I have to add 6 every time. I know ... I am lazy. ;-)
