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

Accessing remote WAN modem configuration page

I had setup site to site VPN. Two sites. The FortiOS version is 6.x on both sites. Lets call the sites site 1 and site 2. There are modems at both sites, connected to the WAN port of Fortigate unit. On site 1, Fortigate unit was configured to use PPPoE connection. On site 2, the fortigate unit was behind NAT.

 

Even though Fortigate unit at site 2 was behind NAT, at the modem, I had set up port forwarding to forward the correct port to the Fortigate unit. On both sites, during IPsec setup, I did not choose the option which stating one of the site was behind NAT.

 

The site to site IPsec VPN connection was up. Computers at both site can connect to each other with no problem. Computers at both sites can ping each other. We can perform file sharing, access intranet sites, etc.

 

But, there is a problem.

 

At site 2, the ip address of the modem connected to the WAN port of Fortigate unit is 192.168.1.x., which is different subnet. Users at site 2 can access the configuration page of the modem, by just entering the ip address of 192.168.1.x at the browser.

 

At site 1, users cannot access the site 2 modem configuration page.

 

Question: How to solve this problem? I want to allow users at site 1 to access the configuration page of the modem connected to the WAN port of Fortigate unit at site 2.

 

The phase two configurations on both sites are as follows:

 

Site 1:

Local address: <local subnets at site 1, which include the IP addresses of all computers, printers, servers, etc>

Remote address: <remote subnet at site 2, which include the IP addresses of all computers, printers, etc>

 

Local address: <local subnets at site 1, which include the IP addresses of all computers, printers, servers, etc>

Remote address: 192.168.1.x (the ip address of the modem connected to the WAN port of fortigate unit at site 2)

 

Site 2:

Local address: <local subnets at site 2, which include the IP addresses of all computers, printers, etc>

Remote address: <remote subnet at site 1, which include the IP addresses of all computers, printers, servers, etc>

 

Local address: 192.168.1.x (the ip address of the modem connected to the WAN port of fortigate unit at site 2)

Remote address: <remote subnet at site 1, which include the IP addresses of all computers, printers, servers, etc>

 

Both sites did not share the same internet connection.

 

So, how to allow the users at site 1 to access the configuration page of modem at site 2? The modem was connected to the WAN port of Fortigate unit.

5 REPLIES 5
Toshi_Esumi
SuperUser
SuperUser

It's a hairpin turn at the site2 FGT, like allowing internet access to vpn users at a FW. You just need a policy vpn->wan port on the site2 FGT to let site1 user to access the modem outside the wan port. 

cshong

Sorry for the late reply. 

 

Toshi Esumi's answer did not help. On site 2, in policy, there is no VPN interface in incoming/outgoing interface.

 

Any suggestions?

 

Toshi_Esumi

Then we need to know more detail in the VPN config. under "config vpn ipsec phase1-interface" for the VPN name, and under "config sys interface" for the same VPN name, which is automatically configured when you configured the VPN. And do you have any zone configured including the vpn?

cshong

Sorry for the late reply. I don't think it is good to show the configuration to public. So, I sent a pm to Toshi Esumi.

Toshi_Esumi

If you don't see anything under "config vpn ipsec phase1-interface", you must be using "policy-base IPsec" vpn instead of "interface-base". Your all vpn config should be under "config vpn ipsec phase1" and "config vpn ipsec phase2". To be honest, I haven't configured "policy-base" vpn for more than last 10 years now. So I don't remember if you can set hair-pin access to the outside of wan interface while the policy-based vpn is coming in the same wan interface. Please ask somebody else if you want to make it work with the current vpn.

 

On the other hand, there are reasons "policy-base" is not around any more. I would recommend you rebuild the vpn with current FGT's default "interface-base" IPsec, which you can route & set policies easily like in your situation.

 

Labels
Top Kudoed Authors