none
UAG DA does not recognize two NICs statically configured? RRS feed

  • Question

  • I'm running Forefront UAG,

    and am attempting to configure the Direct Access component.

    This is being run in a VMware virtual machine.

    When attempting to start the DA Configuration, I get two error messages:

      "At least two network interfaces must be configured with static IP addresses. Configure static IP addresses"
      "The UAG DirectAccess server must be configured with two static, consecutive, public IPv4 addresses, on the Internet-facing physical interface.  Configure the IPv4 addresses and then try again."

    My internal interface is configured with a static IPv4 address and a static IPv6 address.
    My external interface is configured with two static, consecutive, public IP addresses. (143.98.x.x/24)

    Unless UAG DA is missreading the VM's available virtual hardware... what could be the problem?

    Thank you,
    (So close to getting to test DA properly)

    -Aaron

    Wednesday, May 19, 2010 4:35 PM

Answers

  • Hi RMoros,

    that is not accurate. they don't need to be alphabetically consecutive. 9 and 10 are perfectly fine.

    You are probably confusing with Windows DirectAccess Management console, which has a bug where they must be alphabetically consecutive.

    In UAG DA this bug doesn't exist.

    Thanks

    • Marked as answer by Erez Benari Friday, May 28, 2010 8:41 PM
    Saturday, May 22, 2010 1:24 PM

All replies

  • Were they recognised correctly in the GSW?

    Can you see the addresses correctly in the TMG console under the networking node?

    Is the internal NIC configured without a default gateway and the external NIC configured with a default gateway?

    Here is an example of NIC config: http://blog.msedge.org.uk/2010/04/recommended-network-card-configuration_14.html

    Cheers

    JJ


    Jason Jones | Forefront MVP | Silversands Ltd | My Blogs: http://blog.msedge.org.uk and http://blog.msfirewall.org.uk
    Wednesday, May 19, 2010 11:05 PM
    Moderator
  • Is your server part of an array or is it a single node?

    Thursday, May 20, 2010 12:23 PM
  • Good point, here may help if using an array: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd857262.aspx

    Cheers

    JJ


    Jason Jones | Forefront MVP | Silversands Ltd | My Blogs: http://blog.msedge.org.uk and http://blog.msfirewall.org.uk
    Thursday, May 20, 2010 12:35 PM
    Moderator
  • Also, if you want to see how we convert from single server to array in a Test Lab, check out:

    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff607326.aspx

    HTH,

    Tom


    MS ISDUA/UAG DA Anywhere Access Team
    Thursday, May 20, 2010 2:45 PM
    Moderator
  • Hi Amigo. "Two consecutive IP adresses" is a little bit confusing description. They must be "alphabetically" consecutive. This means that x.x.x.9 and x.x.x.10 are not consecutive but x.x.x.10 and x.x.x.11 are.

    Hope it helps


    // Raúl - I love this game
    Thursday, May 20, 2010 4:28 PM
  • Hi Amigo. "Two consecutive IP adresses" is a little bit confusing description. They must be "alphabetically" consecutive. This means that x.x.x.9 and x.x.x.10 are not consecutive but x.x.x.10 and x.x.x.11 are.

    Hope it helps


    // Raúl - I love this game

    You kidding, right?
    Jason Jones | Forefront MVP | Silversands Ltd | My Blogs: http://blog.msedge.org.uk and http://blog.msfirewall.org.uk
    Thursday, May 20, 2010 10:48 PM
    Moderator
  • Hi RMoros,

    that is not accurate. they don't need to be alphabetically consecutive. 9 and 10 are perfectly fine.

    You are probably confusing with Windows DirectAccess Management console, which has a bug where they must be alphabetically consecutive.

    In UAG DA this bug doesn't exist.

    Thanks

    • Marked as answer by Erez Benari Friday, May 28, 2010 8:41 PM
    Saturday, May 22, 2010 1:24 PM
  • Hi RMoros,

    that is not accurate. they don't need to be alphabetically consecutive. 9 and 10 are perfectly fine.

    You are probably confusing with Windows DirectAccess Management console, which has a bug where they must be alphabetically consecutive.

    In UAG DA this bug doesn't exist.

    Thanks


    Phew! :)
    Jason Jones | Forefront MVP | Silversands Ltd | My Blogs: http://blog.msedge.org.uk and http://blog.msfirewall.org.uk
    Monday, May 24, 2010 8:38 AM
    Moderator
  • Hi all. And excuse me for any inconvenience. There was a post some time ago where Tom discussed what I suggested http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/forefrontedgeiag/thread/95105a0d-6030-4148-a81a-25acbe61f0b1/ Maybe doesn`t apply currently
    // Raúl - I love this game
    Monday, May 24, 2010 2:44 PM
  • And Yaniv corrected Tom too ;)
    Jason Jones | Forefront MVP | Silversands Ltd | My Blogs: http://blog.msedge.org.uk and http://blog.msfirewall.org.uk
    Monday, May 24, 2010 4:09 PM
    Moderator
  • Yes - I didn't know at the time that it was fixed with UAG :)

    Thanks!

    Tom

    Monday, May 24, 2010 4:10 PM
  • I should also post using the right account :)

    Tom


    MS ISDUA/UAG DA Anywhere Access Team
    Monday, May 24, 2010 4:15 PM
    Moderator
  • I will write it down one hundred times :(
    // Raúl - I love this game
    Tuesday, May 25, 2010 1:10 PM
  • I will write it down one hundred times :(
    // Raúl - I love this game

    :)
    Jason Jones | Forefront MVP | Silversands Ltd | My Blogs: http://blog.msedge.org.uk and http://blog.msfirewall.org.uk
    Tuesday, May 25, 2010 2:19 PM
    Moderator
  • Is a reinstall still the only method to get the UAG DA page to see the extra ip addresses? I would rather not have an outage just to fix this, if i reinstall, I will just use TMG.
    Sunday, December 26, 2010 11:58 AM
  • Are you using UAG SP1? If so, I think the issue has been addressed.

    HTH,

    Tom


    MS ISDUA/UAG DA Anywhere Access Team Get yourself some Test Lab Guides! http://blogs.technet.com/b/tomshinder/archive/2010/07/30/test-lab-guides-lead-the-way-to-solution-mastery.aspx
    Tuesday, January 4, 2011 2:35 PM
    Moderator
  • Hi Aaron,

    can you please look at the eventvwr.msc

    if there is some error from the TMG/UAG?

    Thursday, July 12, 2012 12:02 PM