Skip to main content
kinmun
New Member
April 12, 2015
Question

load balancing of smtp servers

  • April 12, 2015
  • 1 reply
  • 12332 views

i have 2 smtp servers which is load balanced into one single ip single ip address.

we noticed that once we use the VIP for the smtp servers after doing load balancing in the fortigate, we will encounter some issues.

1st issue we saw was that instead of using the pre-assigned external ip address for smtp server, it will show the firewall wan ip address.

2nd issue is some mails will have issue sending out.

does fortigate load balance VIP supports smtp ?

i read the fortiOS handbook, it only talks abt http, there is no mention that smtp will work.

    1 reply

    Christopher_McMullan
    Staff
    Staff
    April 13, 2015

    There are various levels of persistence and methods of load balancing. You're not tied to just using HTTP traffic.

     

    Check the setting of 'nat-source-vip' on the VIP object, and try toggling it:

    config firewall vip

    edit <vip_name>

    get | grep nat-source-vip

    set nat-source-vip {enable | disable}

    end

    reto_gobat
    New Member
    June 29, 2016

    Hello there

     

    Did you solve your problem? Having the same issue here.

    If we connect to the Load Balancing Virtual IP, the Firewall responds with it's own Interface IP instead of the client IP. This is a bit of a problem, because we would like to only allow relay from specific IP addresses.

     

    Thanks

    Carl_Wallmark
    New Member
    June 29, 2016

    reto.gobat wrote:

    Hello there

     

    Did you solve your problem? Having the same issue here.

    If we connect to the Load Balancing Virtual IP, the Firewall responds with it's own Interface IP instead of the client IP. This is a bit of a problem, because we would like to only allow relay from specific IP addresses.

     

    Thanks

    Hi,

     

    I think you have NAT enabled on the firewall of the VIP ? If so, turn it off.

    If it´s enabled, you would see the firewalls IP instead, just like you described it.