New Member

Question

Addition of alias name after establishment of SD-WAN

Forum|Forum|9 months ago
October 25, 2025
5 replies
685 views

Hello Experts,

I'm curious about addition/change of alias name for interface at SD-WAN.

Here is our situation.

At SD-WAN, we use IPsec aggregation called "AGG" which consists of WAN1 and WAN2
At first, we confirmed both SD-WAN and AGG were established.
Next, we added alias name for WAN1 and WAN2, such as SAT1 and SAT2.
After the addition of alias, SD-WAN was down, although IPsec aggregation itself was established.

Is this situation kind of SD-WAN specification?

When we created SD-WAN, we should have added alias name, I understand.

Any comments are helpful.

funkylicious

SuperUser

hi,

SD-WAN uses zones, virtual-wan-link being the default one and cannot be deleted but you can create other(s).

in it, you add/assign the members but the alias has no relevance as far as i know and adding an alias to an interface should not bring down the interfaces.

can you share the changes you've made and how it looked after?

"jack of all trades, master of none"

rosatechnocrat

Explorer III

That's correct, adding an Alias will not bring interface down. There might be some other reasong for the link going down. You can check system event logs for the interface or SDWAN interfaces going down.

Subscribe "ROSA Technocrat" on Youtube for Fortinet Videos and Troubleshooting https://www.youtube.com/@rosatechnocrat

HT_JDCAuthor

New Member

Hello,

We created new zone called "SDWAN" (default is not used).

WAN interface itself is not down.

Each IPsec tunnel of WAN is not down.

IPsec aggregation is not down.

Only SDWAN is down after addition of alias. Red sign is seen at performance SLA.

The fortigates are not at our hands now.

After we reproduce it, I will come back here.

Thanks,

HT_JDCAuthor

New Member

Hello,

Again we tried it many times.

At our latest version 7.4.9, it does not reproduce.

That is, addition/change of alias name does not affect SD-WAN link.

In the old version (maybe, 7.4.5), it happened.

We do not know well. Right now, we cannot revert to the old version.

Anyway, we have to take care of it when doing the similar things.

Thanks everyone.

Best regards,

kolaktu2

New Member

IIRC, you just need to give the user account running the command Full Control on the computer account itself and even that can be removed after the operation. Complete non-issue, especially since supposedly the user is already an admin of the device in question.

Sign up

Login with SSO

Login to the community

Login with SSO