At 3:53 you create a stealth rule. I really don't understand why you created the stealth rule since the clean-up rule was already dropping all traffic with any-any. Unless you wanted to later filter on who was trying to access the Firewall specifically?
@@Technetguide I understand that you need to protect it. However, the default Clean-up rule was already doing or won't the Destination of `any` not also cover FW-1?
@@Technetguide But you already have a default drop rule in the clean-up rule. Does it matter that the rogue packet destined to the management interface is dropped sooner than the others? I frankly fail to see the necessity of the Stealth rule when the default policy is to drop. You only need to poke holes for traffic you desire.
Thank you, brother! boss!
Welcome
Thank you very much sir..
Please upload a video how management, gateway connect together with sic
Thanks for watching, please find below link
ruclips.net/video/uY8rabZyJyA/видео.html
At 3:53 you create a stealth rule. I really don't understand why you created the stealth rule since the clean-up rule was already dropping all traffic with any-any. Unless you wanted to later filter on who was trying to access the Firewall specifically?
Gateway is a critical device so we need to create this rule to prevent from direct access,
@@Technetguide I understand that you need to protect it. However, the default Clean-up rule was already doing or won't the Destination of `any` not also cover FW-1?
@@akk2766 suppose you have 1k rule instead of checking all rule it will drop with stealth rule
@@Technetguide But you already have a default drop rule in the clean-up rule. Does it matter that the rogue packet destined to the management interface is dropped sooner than the others? I frankly fail to see the necessity of the Stealth rule when the default policy is to drop. You only need to poke holes for traffic you desire.
While installing the drop policy ,i am getting conflict error , please can you help me