Yes, it is supported on newer branch models. Please refer the following URL for details:
↧
Re: Adding IRB interfaces to a security zone
↧
Re: Bandwidth limiting on Downlink on SRX 340
Hi
You have to create two filter one for upload and one for download;
on the download filter you have to use destination-address(local-hosts) as matching condition;
apply as output in the internal interface(lan facing).
Best regards,
AN
↧
↧
Re: Bandwidth limiting on Downlink on SRX 340
Thanks for the pointer, i did create 2 filter and applied them as input and output it worked partially and its applying to all hosts i have a specific set of host that i need this to be applied here's what i have configured.
Filter and Policier
set firewall family inet filter A-UPLINK term a from source-address 10.1.22.88/32
set firewall family inet filter A-UPLINK term a from source-address 10.1.22.89/32
set firewall family inet filter A-UPLINK term a from source-address 10.1.22.85/32
set firewall family inet filter A-UPLINK term a then policer policer-10mb
set firewall family inet filter A-UPLINK term a then accept
set firewall family inet filter A-UPLINK term b from source-address 0.0.0.0/0
set firewall family inet filter A-UPLINKterm b then accept
set firewall family inet filter A-DOWN term a from source-address 10.1.22.88/32
set firewall family inet filter A-DOWN term a from source-address 10.1.22.89/32
set firewall family inet filter A-DOWN term a from source-address 10.1.22.85/32
set firewall family inet filter A-DOWN term a from destination-address 0.0.0.0/0
set firewall family inet filter A-DOWN term a then policer policer-10mb
set firewall family inet filter A-DOWN term a then accept
set firewall family inet filter A-DOWN term b from source-address 0.0.0.0/0
set firewall family inet filter A-DOWN term b then policer policer-10mb
set firewall family inet filter A-DOWN term b then accept
set firewall policer policer-10mb if-exceeding bandwidth-limit 12m
set firewall policer policer-10mb if-exceeding burst-size-limit 625k
set firewall policer policer-10mb then discard
Filter on Internal interface
set interfaces ge-0/0/1 unit 998 family inet filter input A-UPLINK
set interfaces ge-0/0/1 unit 998 family inet filter output A-DOWN
With this configuration there is no more egress traffic drop but the polcier is now applied to all hosts in 10.1.22 subnet what am i missing?
↧
SRX in Transparent Mode not able to ping other devices in same VLAN
Hello Everybody,
I have an SRX in transparent mode, and i configured the two zones trust and untrust and all the polices to allow everything.
I have irb.0 which is in VLAN 3 and has an IP of 172.16.4.254. Devices that are connected to the SRX are able to ping each other. however, i can't ping from the SRX(172.16.4.254) any other devices and vice versa.
From the srx if i ping 172.16.4.1 it will not work and even if i do:
root# run show security flow session source-prefix 172.16.4.1 . it doesn't show anything even though that 172.16.4.1 is continuously pinging 172.16.4.41
below is the SRX config:
.
root# show
## Last changed: 2019-11-13 15:09:27 UTC
version 20190829.221548_builder.r1052644;
system {
root-authentication {
encrypted-password "$6$nPgEtVzv$MBDUcWfKFSDG2x3HYBj0A0Sej7xFvV6E1MK7wudzui7jHv.1n/dTS4jUcxu1lWGNt12GEOjnFSKEBUajcoiyZ/"; ## SECRET-DATA
}
services {
ssh;
netconf {
ssh;
}
dhcp-local-server {
group jdhcp-group {
interface fxp0.0;
interface irb.0;
}
}
web-management {
https {
system-generated-certificate;
}
}
}
name-server {
}
syslog {
archive size 100k files 3;
user * {
any emergency;
}
file messages {
any notice;
authorization info;
}
file interactive-commands {
interactive-commands any;
}
}
max-configurations-on-flash 5;
max-configuration-rollbacks 5;
license {
autoupdate {
url https://ae1.juniper.net/junos/key_retrieval;
}
}
phone-home {
server https://redirect.juniper.net;
rfc-compliant;
}
}
security {
log {
mode stream;
format syslog;
report;
}
screen {
ids-option untrust-screen {
icmp {
ping-death;
}
ip {
source-route-option;
tear-drop;
}
tcp {
syn-flood {
alarm-threshold 1024;
attack-threshold 200;
source-threshold 1024;
destination-threshold 2048;
timeout 20;
}
land;
}
}
}
policies {
from-zone trust to-zone trust {
policy trust-to-trust {
match {
source-address any;
destination-address any;
application any;
}
then {
permit;
log {
session-init;
session-close;
}
count;
}
}
}
from-zone trust to-zone untrust {
policy trust-to-untrust {
match {
source-address any;
destination-address any;
application any;
}
then {
permit;
log {
session-init;
session-close;
}
count;
}
}
}
from-zone untrust to-zone trust {
policy UntrusttoTrust {
match {
source-address any;
destination-address any;
application any;
dynamic-application any;
}
then {
permit;
log {
session-init;
session-close;
}
count;
}
}
}
from-zone untrust to-zone untrust {
policy UntrustToUntrust {
match {
source-address any;
destination-address any;
application any;
}
then {
permit;
log {
session-init;
session-close;
}
count;
}
}
}
}
zones {
security-zone trust {
host-inbound-traffic {
system-services {
all;
}
protocols {
all;
}
}
interfaces {
ge-0/0/1.0;
ge-0/0/2.0;
}
}
security-zone untrust {
screen untrust-screen;
host-inbound-traffic {
system-services {
all;
}
protocols {
all;
}
}
interfaces {
ge-0/0/3.0;
ge-0/0/4.0;
}
}
}
}
interfaces {
ge-0/0/1 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
interface-mode access;
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/2 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
interface-mode access;
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/3 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
interface-mode access;
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/4 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
interface-mode access;
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/5 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/6 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/7 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/8 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/9 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/10 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/11 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/12 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/13 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
ge-0/0/14 {
unit 0 {
family ethernet-switching {
vlan {
members vlan-trust;
}
}
}
}
cl-1/0/0 {
dialer-options {
pool 1 priority 100;
}
}
dl0 {
unit 0 {
family inet {
negotiate-address;
}
family inet6 {
negotiate-address;
}
dialer-options {
pool 1;
dial-string 1234;
always-on;
}
}
}
fxp0 {
unit 0 {
family inet {
address 192.168.1.1/24;
}
}
}
irb {
unit 0 {
family inet {
address 172.16.4.254/16;
}
}
}
}
access {
address-assignment {
pool junosDHCPPool1 {
family inet {
network 192.168.1.0/24;
range junosRange {
low 192.168.1.2;
high 192.168.1.254;
}
dhcp-attributes {
router {
}
propagate-settings ge-0/0/0.0;
}
}
}
pool junosDHCPPool2 {
family inet {
network 192.168.2.0/24;
range junosRange {
low 192.168.2.2;
high 192.168.2.254;
}
dhcp-attributes {
router {
}
propagate-settings ge-0/0/0.0;
}
}
}
}
}
vlans {
vlan-trust {
vlan-id 3;
l3-interface irb.0;
}
}
protocols {
l2-learning {
global-mode transparent-bridge;
}
rstp {
interface all;
}
}
↧
DHCP to remote site over GRE/VLAN
I have a GRE tunnel on a remote SRX to tunnel VLAN 70 traffic across to the local SRX345, where I hope to use a DHCP server to hand out leases across to the remote site computers like:
Is this possible? I want to avoid creating two different subnets on remote/local and double NATing to make it route end-to-end.
↧
↧
Re: SRX in Transparent Mode not able to ping other devices in same VLAN
Hi,
To have L3 interfaces other than management, need you to change the device to switching mode but I see you mention that the device is in transparent mode.
Secondly, I do not see the IRB interface bound to any of the security zone. Please assign it to a zone post changing the device to switching mode and check.
Hope this helps.
Thanks and Regards,
Pradeep Kumar M
↧
Self Routing with routing instance
Hello,
I have an SRX with two routing instance each with a default static route to different upstream provider, all is working well for traffic coming through LAN interface. With an input filter I choose to which routing instance allocate traffic.
I'm trying to accomplish the same for traffic originating from junos, e.g. license autoupdate, config. backup and other.
To do this I assigned lo0.0 a /32 ip address and this filter to lo0.0 output direction:
term 1 {
from {
source-address {
10.20.6.6/32;
}
destination-address {
10.0.0.0/8 except;
192.168.0.0/16 except;
172.20.0.0/20 except;
0.0.0.0/0;
}
}
then {
routing-instance Upstream-WAN1;
}
}
term 2 {
then accept;
}
Also security policy and source nat rule are in place for this kind of traffic.
If I try a ping from cli:
run ping 8.8.8.8
PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8): 56 data bytes
ping: sendto: Operation not permitted
ping: sendto: Operation not permitted
ping: sendto: Operation not permitted
ping: sendto: Operation not permitted
I guess routing information are fine but I miss some security policy.
Does packets originated by SRX go through "junos-host" zone or I have to define a zone with interface lo0.0 ?
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks.
↧
Re: Self Routing with routing instance
You need to put lo0 in security zone
↧
Prevent client input IP address manually
Can I configure my SRX300 to prevent any client computer to input the IP address manually?
I try to use the IP Address binding (MAC address map to IP), however if client input the IP address manually, they still access the untrust network.
How can I control the client computer's IP Address in SRX300 ? Or it must be done in client side?
Thank you so much.
Best Regards
Matthew Ho
↧
↧
Re: SRX 345 QinQ - 802.1ad
Hey
could i ask juniper to take a stand on this?
↧
Some SRX110 Network Addresses Reply to ICMP
We currently have 30 SRX110's in our production network which have been deployed at different times. All are currently running 2 or 3 VLANs (1 for Managment on newer ones, 1 for Users, 1 for VOIP) and we've recently noticed that some network addresses are responding to ICMP while others are not. From everything I've looked at our configs are the same across the different devices so I'm not exactly sure why we're not seeing the same behavior among all of the devices. Is there a setting that would cause a network address to respond to ICMP ? To my limited knowledge network addresses by default do not respond to ICMP the same way a gateway or loopback would.
↧
Re: Self Routing with routing instance
Hello,
do you mean junos-host zone or a new zone ?
Currently I put lo0.0 in a dedicated zone:
> show security zone
Security zone: junos-host
Send reset for non-SYN session TCP packets: Off
Policy configurable: Yes
Interfaces bound: 0
Interfaces: ---> no interface
Security zone: LOOPBACK
Send reset for non-SYN session TCP packets: Off
Policy configurable: Yes
Interfaces bound: 1
Interfaces: lo0.0
Best.
↧
Dynamic VPN connected but cannot access protected resources
hello ,
I have set up dynamic vpn with srx320 .It was working before but now I can get connected via pulse secure but cannot access internal resources.
Srx can ping protected devices but cannot ping dynamic client assigned IP address.
Kindly find attached file and help me to understand where the problem is.
Thank you,
Regards,
↧
↧
Re: Dynamic VPN connected but cannot access protected resources
Hi pooyesh,
You are likely to be facing:
https://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=TSB17441&actp=METADATA&act=login
↧
Re: Prevent client input IP address manually
Hi Matt,
Because configuring an static IP address is performed in the host itself, it could only be blocked/denied at the host side itself.
At the SRX you can force specific addresses to be assigned to specific hosts based on their MAC addresses when the SRX is acting as a DHCP server but thats as far as you can go with manipulating the address assignment.
Hope this helps you and please mark my asnwer as "Solution" if it applies.
↧
Re: Dynamic VPN connected but cannot access protected resources
Thanks so much Ipaniagua .Yes,I am hitting this problem.
↧
overlapping subnet in site- natting config not working
hi ,
I have scenario wher Main office and Site office are connected through IPSEC.
where has (range 10.10.0.0/24) Main office (other vendor Router) <-> Site office X - SRX (which has local ip on same subnet 10.10.0.0/24).
On Site office X I tried something like on SRX for Natting this but it's not working, any suggestions.
set security nat static rule-set A-B from routing-instance OrgA
set security nat static rule-set A-B rule A match destination-address 2.2.2.0/24
set security nat static rule-set A-B rule A then static-nat prefix 10.10.0.0/24 routing-instance OrgB
set security nat static rule-set B-A from routing-instance OrgB
set security nat static rule-set B-A rule B match destination-address 1.1.1.0/24
set security nat static rule-set B-A rule B then static-nat prefix 10.10.0.0/24 routing-instance OrgA
set routing-instances OrgA instance-type virtual-router interface ge-0/0/5.0 # have 10.10.0.200 address
set routing-instances OrgB instance-type virtual-router interface st0.254 # other site connected to VPN has 10.10.0.0/24 subnet.
↧
↧
Re: overlapping subnet in site- natting config not working
When you have overlapping ip ranges across vpn you need to do the translation you have noted on BOTH sides.
Site X uses x.x.x.y/24 for the remote resources
hub site uses x.x.x.z/24 for the remote resources
Both vpn devices the SRX and the other vendor need to do the full subnet translation on their side for the remote.
Also note that if DNS is involved in getting resource addresses in these subnets for either side you will need to have a strategy to get the revised ip address information to the affected client subnet only for that resource.
↧
Re: Prevent client input IP address manually
The feature is not available on the SRX but on EX switches you could enable source guard along with dhcp snooping to prevent such rogue configured devices from getting access to the network. If the mac/ip combination is not valid in the dhcp table the device is prevented from connecting on untrusted ports.
↧
Re: Self Routing with routing instance
There is a kb on all the steps needed to have license updates occur from a routining instance here.
https://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=KB34725
↧