ISE 1.1.1 firewall rules distributed deployment

My question is in reference to the following link:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/security/ise/1.1.1/installation_guide/ise_app_e-ports.html
Basically I am struggling in some areas to work out my firewall rules for a distributed deployment. The referenced documentation is not entirely clear in my opinion. In some instances it is easy to work out what ports need to be opened eg Admin node TCP 22,80,443 for management from administrator hosts/ranges. In other instances it difficult to work out eg TCP 1521 Database listener and AQ is this for ISE nodes only or for access devices aswell
My question is whether there is a better document that details these requirements. What rules are meant to be ISE node - ISE node communications and which rules are for access device - ISE, or ISE - access device. One of the rules I am pretty confused about is the PSN CoA ports. SHould the rule be WLC - PSN on 1700 and 3799 or is it the otherway round or unidirectional?
I am pretty sure that the ports are meant to be ISE-ISE in most instances barring the PSN for Radius and CoA.

Try this for size.
In answer to the specific CoA question, I see no need for the WLC to send CoA to PSN, so just PSN to WLC as far as I can see.
You might be able to cut this list down, and you might have to add to it for any specific requirements.
From PSN to AD (potentially all AD nodes):
TCP 389, 3268, 445, 88, 464
UDP 389, 3268
From PSN to Monitoring nodes:
TCP 443
UDP 20514
PSN to Admin Nodes (2Way):
TCP 443, 1521
ICMP echo and reply (heartbeat)
WLC to PSN:
TCP 443, 8443, 80, 8080
UDP 1645, 1646, 1812, 1813, 1700, 3799, 161, 162, 9993, 67
PSN to other PSN’s (2 way)
UDP 30514, 45588, 45990
Endpoint (Laptop) to PSN (Guest laptops just need to get to external PSN’s, internal users just to internal PSN’s)
TCP 8443, 8905
UDP 8905
Admin/Sponsor to all ISE nodes:
TCP 22, 80, 443, 8080, 8443
UDP 161
PSN access to DNS servers:
TCP/UDP 53
PSN access to NTP servers:
UDP 123

Similar Messages

  • ISE NODE NOT REACHABLE when building distributed deployment

    I am trying to build a distributed deployment with the following personas:
    2 policy admin nodes
    2 monitoring nodes
    4 policy service nodes
    This was a project that was partially implemented but never in production. It was in a distributed deployment, but half the nodes were no longer working (http errors or devices weren't reachable or could not sync). I decided to start from scratch. All nodes were:
    -de-registered
    -application was reset to factory defaults on all nodes
    -upgraded all 8 nodes to 1.1.4.218 patch 1
    -installed all new certs and joined all nodes to the domain
    -added to DNS forward and reverse lookup zones
    When I make 1 admin node primary and register the other nodes (secondary admin, monitoring, policy services) the nodes successfully register and show up in the deployment window of the primary; however, all the nodes show as NODE NOT REACHABLE. After registration, I've noticed that the registered nodes are still showing as STANDALONE if I access the GUI. I've tried rebooting them manually after registration and they are still unreachable. I have also tried resetting the database user password from the CLI on both admin nodes and the results are always the same.

    Originally I had added them all at the same time. I thought that maybe I just wasn't waiting long enough for the sync. I waited an entire day and all the nodes were still unreachable. At this point, I've de-registered all the nodes, rebooted all the nodes, converted the primary back to standalone (the remaining nodes never converted from standalone to distributed even when I rebooted them after registering despite a message that they were successfully registered), converted one node back to primary and tried to register just the secondary admin node giving it plenty of time to sync; this node is still not reachable from the primary.
    I've quadruple checked the certificates on all the nodes, these certs were all added on the same day (just last week) and the default self-signed certs were removed.
    I had restored from a backup on the primary so I might just rest the config on that node and try joining the other nodes before I restore again.

  • Need suggestion for ISE distributed deployment model in two different data centers along with public certificate for HTTPS

    Hi Experts,
    I am bit confused about ISE distributed deployment model .
    I have two data centers one is DC & other one is as a DR I have  requirement of guest access service implementation using CWA and get public certificate for HTTPS to avoid certificate error on client devices :
    how do i deploy ISE persona for HA in this two data centers
    After reading cisco doc , understood that we can have two PAN ( Primary in DC  & Secondary in DR ) like wise for MnT (Monitoring will be as same as PAN ) however I can have 5 PSN running in secondary i.e. in DR ISE however I have confusion about HA for PSN .. since we have all PSN in secondary , it would not work for HA if it fails
    Can anybody suggest me the best deployment solution for this scenario ?
    Another doubt about public certificate :
     Public Certificate: The ISE domain must be a registered or part of a registered domain name on the Internet. for that I need Domain name being used from customer .
    Please do correct me if I am wrong about certificate understanding :
    since Guest will be the outside users , we can not use certificate from internal CA , we need to get the certificate from service provider and install the same in both the ISE servers
    Can anybody explain the procedure to opt the public certificate for HTTPS from service provider ? And how do i install it in both the ISE servers ?

    Hi there. Let me try answering your questions:
    PSN HA: The PSNs are not configured as "primary" or "secondary" inside your ISE deployment. They are just PSN nodes as far as ISE is concerned. Instead, inside your NADs (In your case WLCs) you can specify which PSN is primary, which one is secondary, etc. You can accomplish this by:
    1. Defining all PSN nodes as AAA radius servers inside the WLC
    2. Then under the SSID > AAA Servers Tab, you can list the AAA servers in the order that you prefer. As a result, the WLC will always use the first server listed until that server fails/gets reloaded, etc. 
    3. As a result, you can have one WLC or SSID prefer PSN server A (located in primary DC) while a second WLC or SSID prefer PSN server B (located in backup DC)
    Last but not the least, you could also place PSNs behind a load balancer and that way the traffic would be equally distributed between multiple PSNs. However, the PSN nodes must be Layer 2 adjacent, which is probably not the case if they are located in two different Data Centers
    Certificates: Yes, you would want to get a public certificate to service the guest portal. Getting a public/well known certificate would ensure that most devices out there would trust the CA that signed your ISE certificate. For instance, VeriSign, GoDaddy, Entrust are some of the ones out there that would work just fine. On the other hand, if you use a certificate that was signed by your internal CA, then things would be fine for your internal endpoints that trust your internal CA but for any outsiders (Guests, contractors, etc) that do not trust and do not know who your internal CA is would get a certificate error when being redirected to the ISE guest portal. This in general is only a "cosmetic" issue and if the users click "continue" and add your CA as a trusted authority, the guest page would load and the session would work. However, most users out there would not feel safe to proceed and you will most likely get a lot of calls to your helpdesk :)
    I hope this helps!
    Thank you for rating helpful posts!

  • ISE PSN rebooted and will not rejoin distributed deployment

    Hi,
    A PSN was powered down by accident and I'm trying to register it back to its PAN as part of a distributed deployment but I keep getting the error message "ISE not in Standalone mode".
    I'm not sure how to set the PSN node back to Standalone mode when it's no longer part of the deployment.
    Thanks for any help.
    Barry

    Hi,
    Yes Deregister the PSN from the PAN after deregistration this node become Standalone node.

  • Ise distributed deployment upgrade

    My customer has an ISE deployment with 4 nodes: Admin/Monitor Primary and Secondary plus 2 Policy Server. The Admin nodes are VMs, the Policy nodes are 3315 appliances.
    The system was installed almost three years ago with the version 1.1.0 ... It appears the system never had issues so never was patched or upgraded. Why fix something that is working fine?
    Today there was an issue because the certificates expired, so in the review to get the system up and running again, the update issue bring on to the conversation. We like to do an upgrade to the last supported version. So I wonder for some tips and ideas to take care for planning the upgrade.
    I have some doubts:
    Can the 3315 appliance support the release 1.3 without issues?
    I know the upgrade procedure is basically installing a .tar file, but I'm not clear how the process in a distributed deployment should be. I had run upgrades in standalone systems, but never in a distributed deployment. So, I need to upgrade the Primary Admin only and the other nodes would upgrade automatically?
    I would need to upgrade 1.1 to 1.2 first and then 1.2 to 1.3?
    I undertand release 1.1 was in 32 bits, and the version 1.2 and 1.3 are in 64 bits, so I guess the process would take a long time (perhaps a couple of hours), so a maintenance window would need 3 or 4 hours until the full system became stable.
    Can you give me some advice and suggestions to avoid major issues?
    Regards.
    Daniel Escalante.

    Can you give me some advice and suggestions to avoid major issues?
    Documents related to upgarde were given by Venkatesh refer those. Along with that additional information.
    Can the 3315 appliance support the release 1.3 without issues?
    Cisco ISE-3315-K9 (small) 3
    Supports ISE 1.3
    Any
    1x Xeon 2.66-GHz quad-core processor
    4 GB RAM
    2 x 250 GB SATA4 HDD5
    4x 1 GB NIC6
    I know the upgrade procedure is basically installing a .tar file, but I'm not clear how the process in a distributed deployment should be. I had run upgrades in standalone systems, but never in a distributed deployment. So, I need to upgrade the Primary Admin only and the other nodes would upgrade automatically?
    When upgrading to Cisco ISE, Release 1.2, first upgrade the secondary Administration node to Release 1.2. You do not have to manually deregister the node before an upgrade. Use the application upgrade command to upgrade nodes to Release 1.2. The upgrade process deregisters the node automatically and moves it to the new deployment. If you manually deregister the node before an upgrade, ensure that you have the license file for the Primary Administration node before beginning the upgrade process. If you do not have the file on hand (if your license was installed by a Cisco partner vendor, for example), contact the Cisco Technical Assistance Center for assistance.
    I would need to upgrade 1.1 to 1.2 first and then 1.2 to 1.3? I undertand release 1.1 was in 32 bits, and the version 1.2 and 1.3 are in 64 bits, so I guess the process would take a long time (perhaps a couple of hours), so a maintenance window would need 3 or 4 hours until the full system became stable
    If you are on a version earlier than Cisco ISE, Release 1.2, you must first upgrade to 1.2 and then to 1.3.
    You can upgrade to Cisco ISE, Release 1.2, from any of the following releases:
    Cisco ISE, Release 1.1.0.665 (or 1.1.0 with the latest patch applied)
    Cisco ISE, Release 1.1.1.268 (or 1.1.1 with the latest patch applied)
    Cisco ISE, Release 1.1.2, with the latest patch applied
    Cisco ISE, Release 1.1.3, with the latest patch applied
    Cisco ISE, Release 1.1.4, with the latest patch applied
    Type of Deployment
    Node Persona
    Time Taken for Upgrade
    Standalone (2000 endpoints)
    Administration, Policy Service, Monitoring
    1 hour 20 minutes
    Distributed (25,000 users and 250,000 endpoints)
    Secondary Administration
    2 hours
    Monitoring
    1.5 hours
    After upgrading to ISE 1.2, upgrade to ISE 1.3
    Type of Deployment
    Node Persona
    Time Taken for Upgrade
    Standalone (2000 endpoints)
    Administration, Policy Service, Monitoring
    1 hour 20 minutes
    Distributed (25,000 users and 250,000 endpoints)
    Secondary Administration
    2 hours
    Monitoring
    1.5 hours
    Factors That Affect Upgrade Time
    Number of endpoints in your network
    Number of users and guest users in your network
    Profiling service, if enabled

  • ISE's Internal Root CA. How to generate new one in distributed deployment?

    Hello,
    I have two ISE nodes in distributed deployment. I would like to generate new Internal Root CA certificate. I was able to do that from primary node, but only FOR primary node. How can I achieve this for the other node?
    Best Regards,
    Marek

    Hi Marek-
    All of the certificate management is performed from the Admin Node which becomes the Root CA for the ISE PKI. You generate Subordinate CA certificates to your Policy Nodes from the Primary Admin node. Check this link for more info:
    http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/ise/1-3/admin_guide/b_ise_admin_guide_13/b_ise_admin_guide_sample_chapter_01000.html#task_FF93B4C51BAC4CA196A48B607DAA595D
    Also, since the primary node is the Root CA, you should export the certificate and the private key and import it to your secondary Admin node. This will enable the secondary node to be promoted to a Root CA in case of a failure of the primary admin node:
    http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/ise/1-3/admin_guide/b_ise_admin_guide_13/b_ise_admin_guide_sample_chapter_01000.html#concept_435C4E3FF56949B1B4D5A0C73671AB22
    I hope this helps!
    Thank you for rating helpful posts!

  • ISE Distributed Deployment

    Hi All,
    Deploying multiple PSN's with a  distributed deployment, do all the PSN's have to be in the same domain? I  have 8 set up in one domain, and would like to run a few more through  firewalls and using a different dns domain.
    Also interested to see  how AD integration works with this. I'd still expect to join the nodes  to the common AD domain. Would they be able to join an AD domain which  isn't linked with their FQDN?
    I'm hoping that running the other policy nodes on an external domain, I can use a standard CSR for the external public certs.
    All comments, suggestions, spoliers welcomed! Question is out to Cisco but I know the value of these forums too.

    Hi,
    You will have to join all ISE nodes to the same AD domain since the policy for user enforcement (for any external conditions) is configured at the Primary Admin node and replicated down to the PSNs. However, if you choose to configure a different dns domain for one PSN and then join it to the command AD domain, the only issue I see with this is SAMAccount name being sent in the username and not the UPN.
    If a user requests authentication with johndoe and your AD domain is abc.com but your dns domain is def.com, then ISE will try to authenticate [email protected] (from my experience), there have been some improvements where ISE should be able to note that this is an authentication request and should suffix the request with [email protected] but I am not 100 percent sure.
    If you have a cisco account rep (with your deployment size I am absolute sure you do) have them ping the BU on this issue and see what the official response is.
    Thanks,
    Tarik Admani
    *Please rate helpful posts*

  • Firewall rule for Novell Client

    My company recently purchased McAfee Desktop Firewall and I'm trying to
    configure the rules prior to deployment but I'm having trouble getting
    the Novell Client to cooperate. I've tried having the firewall "learn"
    the client, addresses, ports, protocols, etc. but have had no luck.
    My company is running a mix of Win2k/XP computers as well as Win95/98
    computers so any assistance in creating a firewall rule to allow the
    clients to log in is greatly apprecaited.
    Thanks!
    Ash

    Excellent, thanks!!
    > For NetWare connectivity over IP, you need ports TCP,UDP 524 and 427
    > which are NCP over IP and SLP.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Edison Ortiz
    > Novell Product Support Forum SysOp
    > (No Email Support, Thanks !)

  • WSUS Firewall rules do not use names nor groupnames

    Hi everyone,
    Today I've been playing around with PowerShell Workflows and the firewall cmdlets on my test environment. (Great stuff, Thanks
    Scripting Guys)
    After working out a little workflow I noticed that the firewall rules that were made by the WSUS feature installation had no Name nor DisplayGroup, only the DisplayName.
    My test environment is made up from tree Server 2012 R2 servers with a domain.
    The script I made :
    workflow Get-AllFirewalls
    Parallel{
    InlineScript{
    Get-NetFirewallRule -Enabled True -Action Allow |?{
    $_.Profile -match "Any|Domain"
    } | select Name,DisplayName,direction,DisplayGroup,
    @{n='Port';e={($_|Get-NetFirewallPortFilter).LocalPort}},
    @{n='Protocol';e={($_|Get-NetFirewallPortFilter).Protocol}},
    @{n='Program';e={($_|Get-NetFirewallApplicationFilter).Program}}
    $output = Get-AllFirewalls -PSComputerName (Get-ADComputer -Filter 'OperatingSystem -like "Windows Server*"').name
    $output |Sort-Object DisplayGroup |Format-Table PSComputerName,Name,DisplayName,Direction,Port,Protocol,Program -GroupBy DisplayGroup -AutoSize
    Now this is just for testing and I could get around the fact there are no proper names but I think it's sloppy not to fill the naming attributes.
    Am I the only one with these results or is it just WSUS?

    There are only two rules created, one for HTTP on port 8530 one for HTTPS on port 8531, and the latter isn't even used in most WSUS installations.
    There is no Group Name, because this is not a GROUP of rules, it is two individual rules. One is always enabled; the second is optionally enabled WHEN the WSUS Server is configured to use SSL, and it's enabled by an administrative script provided in the
    WSUS toolset.
    Ergo, a server administrator never has to mess with these two rules at all, so, no, I think it's insignificant that these rules may be missing a couple of generally irrelevant attributes.
    Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCSA, MCITP:EA, MCDBA
    SolarWinds Head Geek
    Microsoft MVP - Software Packaging, Deployment & Servicing (2005-2014)
    My MVP Profile: http://mvp.microsoft.com/en-us/mvp/Lawrence%20R%20Garvin-32101
    http://www.solarwinds.com/gotmicrosoft
    The views expressed on this post are mine and do not necessarily reflect the views of SolarWinds.

  • TMG Server Firewall Rule

    Hi experts,
    I am trying to deploy Forefront TMG in a Virtualized Environment.
    The software I am using is Oracle VM VirtualBox.
    I have made 2 server machines . One is a domain controller and on the
    other machine I have installed FTMG 2010. The TMG server is part of the domain.
    It has two NICs one for WAN & the other one for LAN
    On the tmg server I have made a firewall rule that allows all outbound traffic
    to an AD user.
    On another Win7 Virtual Machine that is joined to the domain. I logged in as a user
    and inthe internet options of IE I configured the proxy settings that points
    to my TMG Server. But nothing is showing up even the websnse page.
    I just shows 'Internet Explorer cannot show the webpage'.
    Can anybody help me where I m mistaking....!!!

    Hi There, 
    As mentioned by other experts you WOULD need to have a proper DNS infra, before you could setup TMG as forward proxy.
    Also you can check these articles to learn more about setting up TMG for forward proxy.
    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc441445.aspx
    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee869543.aspx
    Also to isolate the issue, you can try connecting to the same Sites by by-passing TMG, and connecting to Internet directly.

  • How to reload firewall rules from command line on firewall ?

    Hi all,
    I am trying to create script that controls firewall on server. OS version is OS X Server 10.5.6.
    Part of firewall rules is created using firewall admin tools, part of Server Admin Tools. My first question is where are those rules stored permanently ? As far as I understood it should be set of ipfw rules but they are not stored in /etc/ipfilter/ipfw.conf.
    Idea of script is this:
    I have set of rules that should be controlled by Server Admin Tools.
    Also, I have some dynamic rules.
    Whenever some change occurs, I created script that does following:
    /sbin/ipfw -f flush - to flush all existing rules
    /sbin/serveradmin stop ipfilter - to stop existing firewall
    /sbin/serveradmin start ipfilter - to restart firewall and reload permanent rules
    Add my set of rules...
    After flushing all rules and issuing stop and start ipfilter none of rules set through Server Admin Tools are not reloaded. So how should I reload them ? How to save them permanently in the first place ?
    Please note that I do not have access to server (for security reasons). I am developing script on my Mac, sending to client and he tests it. So I cannot do a lot of testing.
    Thank you in advance.
    Best regards,
    Dusan

    Unix and Terminal queries are best posted to the Unix forum under OS X Technologies where those mavens frolic.

  • 0x8007000e (E_OUTOFMEMORY) while adding a firewall rule using the windows firewall COM API

    Hello,
    Configuration: Windows Embedded 8 64-bit.
    I'm using the Windows Firewall with Advanced Security COM API. The program uses the INetFwRules interface. Basically, I'm using the following code (Form the code sample available here : http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/dd339604%28v=vs.85%29.aspx.)
     I get the error when performing "hr = pFwRules->Add(pFwRule);".
    We can also encounter the problem when removing a rule (using pFwRules->Remove(ruleName);)
    HRESULT hrComInit = S_OK;
    HRESULT hr = S_OK;
    INetFwPolicy2 *pNetFwPolicy2 = NULL;
    INetFwRules *pFwRules = NULL;
    INetFwRule *pFwRule = NULL;
    long CurrentProfilesBitMask = 0;
    BSTR bstrRuleName = SysAllocString(L"SERVICE_RULE");
    BSTR bstrRuleDescription = SysAllocString(L"Allow incoming network traffic to myservice");
    BSTR bstrRuleGroup = SysAllocString(L"Sample Rule Group");
    BSTR bstrRuleApplication = SysAllocString(L"%systemroot%\\system32\\myservice.exe");
    BSTR bstrRuleService = SysAllocString(L"myservicename");
    BSTR bstrRuleLPorts = SysAllocString(L"135");
    // Initialize COM.
    hrComInit = CoInitializeEx(
    0,
    COINIT_APARTMENTTHREADED
    // Ignore RPC_E_CHANGED_MODE; this just means that COM has already been
    // initialized with a different mode. Since we don't care what the mode is,
    // we'll just use the existing mode.
    if (hrComInit != RPC_E_CHANGED_MODE)
    if (FAILED(hrComInit))
    printf("CoInitializeEx failed: 0x%08lx\n", hrComInit);
    goto Cleanup;
    // Retrieve INetFwPolicy2
    hr = WFCOMInitialize(&pNetFwPolicy2);
    if (FAILED(hr))
    goto Cleanup;
    // Retrieve INetFwRules
    hr = pNetFwPolicy2->get_Rules(&pFwRules);
    if (FAILED(hr))
    printf("get_Rules failed: 0x%08lx\n", hr);
    goto Cleanup;
    // Create a new Firewall Rule object.
    hr = CoCreateInstance(
    __uuidof(NetFwRule),
    NULL,
    CLSCTX_INPROC_SERVER,
    __uuidof(INetFwRule),
    (void**)&pFwRule);
    if (FAILED(hr))
    printf("CoCreateInstance for Firewall Rule failed: 0x%08lx\n", hr);
    goto Cleanup;
    // Populate the Firewall Rule object
    pFwRule->put_Name(bstrRuleName);
    pFwRule->put_Description(bstrRuleDescription);
    pFwRule->put_ApplicationName(bstrRuleApplication);
    pFwRule->put_ServiceName(bstrRuleService);
    pFwRule->put_Protocol(NET_FW_IP_PROTOCOL_TCP);
    pFwRule->put_LocalPorts(bstrRuleLPorts);
    pFwRule->put_Grouping(bstrRuleGroup);
    pFwRule->put_Profiles(CurrentProfilesBitMask);
    pFwRule->put_Action(NET_FW_ACTION_ALLOW);
    pFwRule->put_Enabled(VARIANT_TRUE);
    // Add the Firewall Rule
    hr = pFwRules->Add(pFwRule);
    if (FAILED(hr))
    printf("Firewall Rule Add failed: 0x%08lx\n", hr);
    goto Cleanup;
    This works pretty well but, sometimes, at system startup, adding a rule ends up with the error 0x8007000e (E_OUTOFMEMORY) ! At startup, the system is always loaded cause several applications starts at the same time. But nothing abnormal. This is quite a random
    issue.
    According MSDN documentation, this error indicates that the system "failed to allocate the necessary memory".
    I'm not convinced that we ran out of memory.
    Has someone experienced such an issue? How to avoid this?
    Thank you in advance.
    Regards, -Ruben-

    Does Windows 8 desktop have the same issue? Are you building a custom WE8S image, or are you using a full WE8S image? The reason I ask is to make sure you have the modules in the image to support the operation.
    Is Windows Embedded 8.1 industry an option?
    www.annabooks.com / www.seanliming.com / Book Author - Pro Guide to WE8S, Pro Guide to WES 7, Pro Guide to POS for .NET

  • Can't add a new Firewall Rule

    I have a very curious issue: I cannot add any new firewall rules at all! Clicking on the New Button does nothing and on the console I get
    System Preferences[487] * -[NSCFString objectForKey:]: selector not recognized [self = 0x3f11b0]
    I have flushed the firewall with ipfw, deleted the plist file, repaired permissions but the problem ist still there. Any suggestions? (apart from reinstallation)
    Adding Firewall Rules through ipfw works...

    Whenever I use ipfw I lose the ability to use System Preferences. At first I thought that it compared kernel memory with the plist file and if it found a difference, assumed another firewall was running and disabled itself. But I also deleted the plist file (assuming it would build one from kmem) but that didn't work. Right now I assume there's another file somewhere. It wouldn't make any sense to keep another table in kmem. The weird part is that rules can be the same, but different sequence numbers will cause this problem. There weren't sequence numbers in the plist file, so there's probably another file somewhere.
    I think your error is from the missing plist file. A reboot should clear it up.

  • Appending Firewall Rules to vShield Edge with PowerCLI Script

    Hi,
    I have a script which enables us to upload 4k worth of firewall rules, but every time it executes, all existing rules are over written.
    Is this something to do with the API or just a scripting issue - if so, can anyone suggest how to append on to the existing set?
    Update:
    So obviously the following line seems to create a new instance of the firewall:
    $fwService = New-Object vmware.vimautomation.cloud.views.firewallservice
    Because the next 3 lines after are setting the main firewall parameters again - something you wouldn't need to do if we were just adding new rules to the existing firewall.
    $fwService.DefaultAction = "drop"
    $fwService.LogDefaultAction = $false
    $fwService.IsEnabled = $true
    Is there a way to use a PowerShell command such as add-member rather than new-object?
    param (
    [parameter(Mandatory = $true, HelpMessage="vCD Server")][alias("-server","s")][ValidateNotNullOrEmpty()][string[]]$CIServer,
    [parameter(Mandatory = $true, HelpMessage="Org")][alias("-vOrg","o")][ValidateNotNullOrEmpty()][string[]]$orgName,
    [parameter(Mandatory = $true, HelpMessage="OrgNet")][alias("-orgNet","n")][ValidateNotNullOrEmpty()][string[]]$orgNet,
    [parameter(Mandatory = $true, HelpMessage="CSV Path")][alias("-file","f")][ValidateNotNullOrEmpty()][string[]]$csvFile
    # Add in the VI Toolkit
    if ( (Get-PSSnapin -Name VMware.VimAutomation.Core -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue) -eq $null ) {
    Add-PSsnapin VMware.VimAutomation.Core
    if ( (Get-PSSnapin -Name VMware.VimAutomation.Cloud -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue) -eq $null ) {
    Add-PSsnapin VMware.VimAutomation.Cloud
    try {
    Connect-CIServer -Server $CIServer 2>&1 | out-null
    } catch {
    Exit
    #Search EdgeGW
    try {
      $myOrgNet = Get-Org -Name $orgName | Get-OrgNetwork -Name $orgNet
      $edgeHREF = $myOrgNet.ExtensionData.EdgeGateway.Href
      $edgeView = Search-Cloud -QueryType EdgeGateway -ErrorAction Stop | Get-CIView | where {$_.href -eq $edgeHREF}
    } catch {
    [System.Windows.Forms.MessageBox]::Show("Exception: " + $_.Exception.Message + " - Failed item:" + $_.Exception.ItemName ,"Error.",0,[System.Windows.Forms.MessageBoxIcon]::Exclamation)
      Exit
    #Item to Configure Services
    $edgeView.Configuration.EdgeGatewayServiceConfiguration
    $fwService = New-Object vmware.vimautomation.cloud.views.firewallservice
    $fwService.DefaultAction = "drop"
    $fwService.LogDefaultAction = $false
    $fwService.IsEnabled = $true
    $fwService.FirewallRule = @()
    Ipcsv -path $csvFile |
    foreach-object
    $fwService.FirewallRule += New-Object vmware.vimautomation.cloud.views.firewallrule
    $rowNum = $_.Num -as [int]
    $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].description = $_.Descr
    $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].protocols = New-Object vmware.vimautomation.cloud.views.firewallRuleTypeProtocols
    switch ($_.Proto)
    "tcp" { $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].protocols.tcp = $true }
    "udp" { $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].protocols.udp = $true }
    "any" { $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].protocols.any = $true }
    default { $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].protocols.any = $true }
    $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].sourceip = $_.SrcIP
    if ($_.SrcPort -eq "any" ) { $srcPort = "-1" } else { $srcPort = $_.SrcPort }
    $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].sourceport = $srcPort
    $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].destinationip = $_.DstIP
    $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].destinationportrange = $_.DstPortRange
    $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].policy = $_.Policy
    #$fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].direction = $_.Direction
    #$fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].MatchOnTranslate = [System.Convert]::ToBoolean($_.MatchOnTranslate)
    $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].isenabled = [System.Convert]::ToBoolean($_.isEnabled)
    $fwService.FirewallRule[$rowNum].enablelogging = [System.Convert]::ToBoolean($_.EnableLogging)
    #configure Edge
    $edgeView.ConfigureServices($fwService)
    Thanks,
    Scott.

    Hi,
    Agree with Ed, you can publish CAS array VIP to internet, and use it to configure Federated Delegation.
    Thanks.
    Niko Cheng
    TechNet Community Support

  • SA 540 INBOUND FIREWALL RULES NOT WORKING

    Hi all,
    I am having trouble configuring the firewall for the SA 540.
    client 1 (160.222.46.154) ----- switch ------ sa 540 ------ cisco 887 W ------ client 2 (50.0.0.10).
    client 1 can ping client 2, however client 2 cannot ping client 1. The default outbound policy (allow all) is set on the sa 540, and I have tried configuring a blanket ipv4 rule on the sa 540 to allow 'all' to 'any' (for all services) related to traffic from the WAN to LAN, and visa versa. The output from the logs are as follows:
    Fri Jan 7 13:43:04 2000(GMT +1000) WARN FIREWALL 50.0.0.10 160.222.46.154 [firewall] LOG_PACKET[DROP] IN=WAN OUT=WAN SRC=50.0.0.10 DST=160.222.46.154 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0
    Component: KERNEL
    Fri Jan 7 13:43:09 2000(GMT +1000) WARN FIREWALL 50.0.0.10 160.222.46.154 [firewall] LOG_PACKET[DROP] IN=WAN OUT=WAN SRC=50.0.0.10 DST=160.222.46.154 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0
    Component: KERNEL
    Fri Jan 7 13:43:14 2000(GMT +1000) WARN FIREWALL 50.0.0.10 160.222.46.154 [firewall] LOG_PACKET[DROP] IN=WAN OUT=WAN SRC=50.0.0.10 DST=160.222.46.154 PROTO=UDP SPT=60737 DPT=53
    Component: KERNEL
    Basically any connection identified as coming in from the WAN (i.e. IN=WAN) is dropped. I set up a new vlan on the cisco 887 W, in the 160.222.46.x address space, and connected a spare port directly to the sa 540 and had no problem testing connectivity to any device via ping. Obviously the zone communication is LAN to LAN and firewall treats the traffice differently.
    I assumed that creating an all encompassing rule to allow all trafiic, for all services, between the LAN and WAN (in both directions) would be equivalent to placing the appliance in PASS THROUGH mode? There is no securtiy set on the 887 W or the switch.
    Also is anybody could explain what 'SELF' means in the conttext IN=SELF or OUT=SELF it would be much appreciated. Firmware is latest.
    Thank you.
    Regards
    Marc

    On closer analysis and with some help from Experts Exchange it did seem non sensical to have both the IN and OUT as the WAN interface, but I had literally exhausted every avenue possible bar 1- changing the routing mode to CLASSIC and configuring a static route (which was at a higher administrative level than my RIP advertised routes) and took preferece when forwarding the packets.
    Now the SA540 firewall rules work as I would expect and I can route between all zones. To summise it appears as if the Double NAT from the router (887W) and then the SA540 was the issue, and the innability to configure any workaround in the interface of the SA54O firewall rules.
    It really makes you appreciate the power of the command line and the full scope of CIsco's command line options. Does anybody know if (and how) it would be possible to configure Double NAT on the SA540?
    Regards
    Marc

Maybe you are looking for