Support Forum
The Forums are a place to find answers on a range of Fortinet products from peers and product experts.
Frosty
Contributor

Address objects with "set associated-interface xxxx"

We have an FG200E running v5.6.2 and using about 5-6 interfaces/subnets.

The configuration was largely cut-n-pasted from an older FG200B running v5.0.10 via CLI.

Most of the Address objects have an Interface explicitly set (i.e. set associated-interface xxxx) and I've noticed that this cannot be changed via the GUI and must therefore be edited via CLI.

We are just about to do a major reconfiguration of our internal networks, so I am building out the new Interfaces with new IP Addresses/Subnets.

I'll want to progressively pick up Address objects, give them a new IP Address, which will of course mean that they are to be found in a different Interface.

Is there any particular reason to keep these associated-interface settings?  I seem to have the options of:

(1)  set up the Address object via CLI with a new IP Address and also a new associated-interface value; or

(2) set up the Address object via CLI with a new IP Address, but "unset associated-interface"

We don't have a huge number of objects, and because we have good naming conventions, it is usually apparent just by considering the object's Name/Alias what interface/subnet is belongs to.

3 REPLIES 3
ede_pfau
SuperUser
SuperUser

hi,

 

interface binding is meant to minimise input in error, using the GUI. Years ago, when this was introduced, I noticed that I couldn't change the association which really kept me from getting things done. Since then, I always keep an address object un-associated. Most of the time I know what I do when using address objects in policies, I haven't regretted this once in a long time.

Ede Kernel panic: Aiee, killing interrupt handler!
Ede Kernel panic: Aiee, killing interrupt handler!
emnoc
Esteemed Contributor III

I prefer not,  and here's why;

 

1: it makes moving object around that more harder and time consuming

 

2: if you change hardware out and use new "interface-names" you will end up with  a lot MS f5 find/replace or unix vi/sed subsitution

 

e.g

 

port1 is now reference in the  new hardware via   vlan100  etc...

 

3: leave  the object un-associated  unless you have some hardcore reason for enabling  it, it's not a mandatory set option for a fortios fw.address.object

PCNSE 

NSE 

StrongSwan  

PCNSE NSE StrongSwan
Frosty

Thanks both for your feedback.

Confirms my best bet is to unset the associations and give myself more flexibility.

Announcements

Select Forum Responses to become Knowledge Articles!

Select the “Nominate to Knowledge Base” button to recommend a forum post to become a knowledge article.

Labels
Top Kudoed Authors