Thread Info
  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 9 replies
  • Subscribers 1 subscriber
  • Views 4544 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
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

Interface binding

firebear_01
Hi all,
in V7 i can bind a client-definition to a Interface.
to wich Interface should i bind a definition that is behind a VPN-Tunnel ?
Dont find this in the docs maybe iam not looking right ??

Thanks for any answer
firebear


This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents Reply Children
  • 0 in reply to BarryG
    Barry, I recently took a loook  at a person's Astaro configuration.  Virtually all of the Network/Host definitions were bound to a specific interface.  While I suppose that would work, it seems like that unnecessarily complicates reconfiguration.

    The only time I've bound a definition to an interface was when I've created an "Internet" definition, 0.0.0.0/0 bound to the External interface.  I'm not sure that binding the definition bought me anything.

    Does binding a defintion to an interface do anything other than limit the use of the definition?  I can't imagine that it ever makes sense to have two such definitions that differ only in name and bound interface, but I don't understand.

    Can you give us a 50-word-or-less explanation of binding?

    Thanks - Bob
     
    Sophos UTM Community Moderator
    Sophos Certified Architect - UTM
    Sophos Certified Engineer - XG
    Gold Solution Partner since 2005
    MediaSoft, Inc. USA
  • 0 in reply to BAlfson
    I don't use it, but my understanding is that it _can_ make filtering simpler, if used the right way.

    I'm not sure that I can think of a good example, but I know I've seen some posted here before.

    Barry
Cookie Information Banner