Question 1110
At Northbridge Insurance, the FortiGate 7.6 security administration team encounters the following authorized operational case: a team copies route-based tunnel interface firewall rules into a policy-based IPsec design and traffic never matches. They need a defensible FortiOS configuration, diagnosis, validation or prevention decision. What root condition most directly explains the described FortiGate symptom?
Explanation
Correct Answer
Policy-based and route-based IPsec have different policy and interface matching requirements. The mechanism is relevant because the stated policy-based versus route-based vpn incident concerns the actual selected path, policy, identity or inspection state. The appropriate response is to use the correct FortiOS security-policy model for the chosen IPsec tunnel type; verify it through this observed condition: a permitted test flow is accepted by the appropriate VPN policy and encrypted.
Incorrect Answers
IKE control-channel establishment is not equivalent to permitted encrypted application forwarding explains a different situation, phase-one up but no payload traffic, where both peers show an established IKE SA yet applications fail because no relevant phase-two or firewall policy state exists. It does not account for the specific observed policy-based versus route-based vpn condition at Northbridge Insurance. The decisive mechanism here is: Policy-based and route-based IPsec have different policy and interface matching requirements.
A wizard's initial example selectors and permit addresses may not match every required protected network explains a different situation, vpn wizard group policy permissions, where a newly created wizard tunnel is reachable from one internal subnet but the wizard-generated policy does not include the second authorized subnet. It does not account for the specific observed policy-based versus route-based vpn condition at Northbridge Insurance. The decisive mechanism here is: Policy-based and route-based IPsec have different policy and interface matching requirements.
Tunnel selector and route scope decide which client packets use the encrypted corporate path explains a different situation, split tunnel protection for remote vpn, where a remote IPsec client is routed through headquarters for every internet destination although company policy only requires private application prefixes. It does not account for the specific observed policy-based versus route-based vpn condition at Northbridge Insurance. The decisive mechanism here is: Policy-based and route-based IPsec have different policy and interface matching requirements.