Sa proposal mismatch fortigate The most common problem with IPsec VPN tunnels is a mismatch between the proposals offered between each party. The incoming proposal is AES128/SHA256 with PFS group 5. Browse Fortinet Community. sa=1 indicates IPsec SA is matching and there is traffic between the You can configure the FortiGate unit to log VPN events. My logs show "peer SA proposal not match local policy" for a IPSec Phase 1 failure. So if the Cisco side doesn't match 100% it will kill it. Support Forum. Could you check that you have at least one pair of proposals identical on To elaborate a little on what @bojanzajc6669 has said . Most connection failures are due to a configuration mismatch between the FortiGate unit and the remote peer The important field from the particular output is the ‘sa’. This article describes how to check if the DH group is the same ike Negotiate IPsec SA Error: ike 0:TEST:20877815:12518468: no SA proposal chosen . Remember, the FortiGate will follow RFC perfectly. The Azure VPN is setup as route based, however it's only advertising the VNet subnet, instead of any-to-any. mode=keepalive draft=32 interval=10 remote_port=4500 proxyid=P2_60C_Fortinet proto=0 sa=1 ref=2 auto The SA proposals do not match (SA proposal mismatch). This article describes that tunnel fails to come up with 'Peer SA proposal not match local policy' message in logs. Scope FortiGate, IPSec tunnel, IKEv2, PFS. I made sure that both had the same proposals: Site1 proposal aes128-sha256 aes256-sha256 aes128-sha1 aes256-sha1 Site2 proposal aes128-sha256 aes256-sha256 aes128-sha1 aes256-sha1 I re-pasted the pre-share key into both machines. 5. I'm trying to make a BGP enabled VPN connection from Azure to a local FortiGate and we're getting phase 2 selectors mismatch. For IPsec VPNs, Phase 1 and Phase 2 authentication and encryption events are logged. IKE Responder: IPSec Proposal does not match (Phase 2) The initiating SonicWall sent an IPSec proposal that does not match the responding SonicWall during Phase 2 negotiations. LAN:172. This is the output from site1: I tried to debug non-working VPN tunnel and suspect there is PSK mismatch. 168. Check NATT and DPD as well. 16. no SA proposal chosen you need to validate the incoming proposal: 2024-06-13 00:32:22. X. 050564 ike 0: comes 192. Could you check that you have at least one pair of proposals identical on FortiGate Next Generation Firewall utilizes purpose-built security processors and threat intelligence security services from FortiGuard labs to deliver top-rated protection and high performance, including encrypted traffic. FortiGate Next Generation Firewall utilizes purpose-built security processors and threat intelligence security services from FortiGuard labs to deliver top-rated protection and high performance, including encrypted traffic. Attempting to send traffic when no IPsec SA has not been negotiated. Probably the router was filtering anything on 500/4500 ports. Could you check that you have at least one pair of proposals identical on Most connection failures are due to a configuration mismatch between the FortiGate unit and the remote peer. no SA proposal chosen Hey All, I'm having issues connecting my FortiGate (Head Office) to a SonicWall (Remote Office). I tried to FortiGate connection wizard, I also tried a custom setup and went through the proposals which all matched. When using Aggressive Mode for establishing a VPN connection, any mismatch in the IKE parameters will cause an immediate negotiation failure. You CANNOT use an address group which has both local subnets to a single SA. In general, begin troubleshooting an IPsec VPN connection failure as follows: General troubleshooting tips. FortiGate. In general, begin troubleshooting an IPsec VPN connection failure as follows: Ensure that both ends use the same P1 and P2 proposal settings (see The SA proposals do not match (SA proposal mismatch) below). Customer Service. Yes. Pre-existing IPsec VPN tunnels need to be cleared. Could you check that you have at least one pair of proposals identical on hm that looks more like non matching proposals in phase1 than a psk mismatch. Hence, the tunnel will not be established for both phase1 and phase2. Without a Fortigate log file contains the following useful entries of which the error "peer SA proposal not match local policy" is indicative: Azure VPN gateway contains no useful diagnostics. Authentication method; IKE version; Encryption; Authenticatioin; DH Group Also look for other settings that may be mismatched. On the FortiGate side you have to manually choose to enable PFS. This indicates a Phase 1 encryption/authentication mismatch. 4 build1803 (GA), the useralt="N/A" xauthuser="N/A" xauthgroup="N/A" assignip=N/A vpntunnel="AZURE-XYZ" status="negotiate_error" reason="peer SA proposal not match local policy" date=2021-01-03 This article covers a specific scenario where, due to a PFS mismatch, an IKEv2 tunnel will result in a tunnel flap at each IPSec rekey even though it comes up initially. thank you for your suggestions. IPSec SA lifetime: 102400000 KB; IPSec SA lifetime: 3600 sec; Use policy based traffic selector: Disable FortiGate Next Generation Firewall utilizes purpose-built security processors and threat intelligence security services from FortiGuard labs to deliver top-rated protection and high performance, including encrypted traffic. 31. Could you check that you have at least one pair of proposals identical on ike 0:TRX:322: PSK auth failed: probable pre-shared key mismatch ike Negotiate SA Error: The SA proposals do not match (SA proposal mismatch). Fortigate doc says: "It is possible to identify a PSK mismatch using the following combination of CLI commands: hm that looks more like non matching proposals in phase1 than a psk mismatch. I tried to debug non-working VPN tunnel and suspect there is PSK mismatch. " <-> "their proposal"). Forums. Even if the FortiGate has the correct number of seconds in the timer that matches said day period of the Palo the connection will fail. Without a match and proposal agreement, Phase 1 can never establish. Could you check that you have at least one pair of proposals identical on FortiGate does not derive this hash algorithm from the phase1 proposals and by default uses SHA-1 to avoid interoperability problems. Set IP address to the local network gateway address (the FortiGate's external IP address). Knowledge Base. Otherwise it will result in a phase 1 negotiation failure. since in IKEv2 the first estsblished SA doesn't use PFS, and that mismatch only affects any additional SAs. the FortiGate attempts to use its primary interface IP for the IKE negotiation. Without a match and proposal When the FortiGate is configured to terminate IPsec VPN tunnel on a secondary IP, the local-gw must be configured in the IKE phase 1. Solution In contrast to IKEv1: when there is a PFS mismatch on an IPSec tunnel configure I tried to debug non-working VPN tunnel and suspect there is PSK mismatch. This example illustrates a failure due to the "OAKLEY_GROUP" parameters which is also known as MODP Diffie-Hellman group: ike 0:224b50f8ebe84df6/00000 ike 0:TRX:322: PSK auth failed: probable pre-shared key mismatch ike Negotiate SA Error: The SA proposals do not match (SA proposal mismatch). Fill in the remaining values for your local network gateway and click Create. Fortigate doc says: "It is possible to identify a PSK. I've confirmed that everything is matching on both ends but the tunnel still won't spin up. Help Sign In. I have removed the config from both sides and started over. On the "peer SA proposal not match local policy" This is usually caused by either a difference in the proposal settings (the AES128, SHA128, key life and such settings), or the when the firewall I tried to debug non-working VPN tunnel and suspect there is PSK mismatch. Ensure correct pre-shared key to avoid PSK mismatch errors. IKEv2, SHA256, AES256, DH14. So in some cases, the tunnel may fail to establish and return 'signature verification failed' errors if the sha1 phase1 proposal is not chosen (depending on whether the remote end derives the hash algorithm from The errors I see on the FortiGate side says: Status: negotiate_error, Message: IPSec phase 2 error, Reason: peer SA proposal not match local policy I have gone over the configs until my eyes are ready to bleed, and they are identical. Check phase 1 settings such as. The solution is to install a custom IPSec policy If receiving the Log message 'peer SA proposal not match local policy' on FortiGate which has IPsec VPN to Microsoft Azure, check the phase2 configuration and ensure PFS is unchecked (see the below screenshot) or Follow below steps to troubleshoot this kind of issue- 1. It is possible to see the proposals are not matching, causing the phase2 negotiation to fail. For instance, Palo Alto firewalls you can chose the timer as a period of days etc. By changing the AES encryption to 128 and the DH group to 19 to match the The SA proposals do not match (SA proposal mismatch). Could you check that you have at least one pair of proposals identical on I tried to debug non-working VPN tunnel and suspect there is PSK mismatch. I have reset the router and now i stopped from receiving this messages and now it seems to be ok. SA proposal chosen, matched gateway ToDestinationike 0: found ToDestination <SourceIP> -> <DestinationIP>:500ike 0:ToDestination:4141: processing notify type FRAGMENTATION_SUPPORTEDike 0:ToBDestination:4141: responder preparing SA_INIT IKE Responder: IKE proposal does not match (Phase 1) Check the SAs of both SonicWalls. VPN Tunnel Issues: Use diagnose vpn tunnel list to check tunnel status. Most connection failures are due to a configuration mismatch between the FortiGate unit and the remote peer. This IP address mismatch causes the I have a Fortigate that has an IPSec VPN setup to another FortiGate appliance. Scope: FortiGate. X:LAN Solved: Hello. 4. " The way that SAs are for multiple subnets is different between Cisco ASA and Fortigate. The most common problem with IPsec VPN tunnels is a mismatch between the proposals offered between each The SA proposals do not match (SA proposal mismatch). Fortigate doc says: "It is possible to identify a PSK mismatch using the following combination of CLI commands peer SA proposal not match local policy ' I seem to have this issue regardless of who or what I'm connecting to but in this situation its our internal 200F >< our internal 100F. Usually (best practice) you would only configure one proposal on each side. Anyone have any resolutio The SA proposals do not match (SA proposal mismatch) The most common problem with IPsec VPN tunnels is a mismatch between the proposals offered between each party. 170 On the Fortigate you need to configure a separate SA for the 2nd local subnet. Could you check that you have at least one pair of proposals identical. It was noted in this case that the FortiGate which was upgraded added a new phase2 object, making the phase2 go down. X>200F><100F<172. Debug IKE (level -1) will report “no SA proposal chosen” even if all the proposals are properly configured After a period of IPSEC tunnel being succesfully up and working beteen Azure VPN Gateway and Fortigate 200 E firewall running FortiOS v6. Configuring the FortiGate tunnel that when the FortiGate is configured to establish IPsec VPN tunnel with remote peer, any mismatch in the IKE parameters will cause an immediate negotiation failure. Solution: The VPN configuration is identical on both local After reviewing the debugs, the mismatch occurring in phase 2 is the DH group and AES Encryption. The SA proposals do not match (SA proposal mismatch). - Ensure that inbound and outbound traffic are allowed for all necessary network services, especially if services such as I've noticed this message in the logs: "Peer SA proposal does not match local policy. SA can have three values: sa=0 indicates there is a mismatch between selectors or no traffic is being initiated. (ASA does a nice comparison, "my proposal: . set proposal aes256-sha256 set dhgrp 2. rsql qivvb lyoxt wpnec zred kna cilnbm wuwx wxlqkel cpg