AZTCOFW / TECHNICAL GUIDE
Alternate Causes
On occasion these issues can be caused by other factors that lead to asymmetric routing, such as issues with route-to
or reply-to, both having to do with gateways on interface settings.
Defining gateways under System > Routing does not cause this, but rather these problems can come up when the gateway is improperly configured on the interface pages, Interfaces > WAN, Interfaces > LAN, and so on.
Gateway set when it should not be set
If a gateway is set on an internal interface, such as LAN, it can cause problematic behavior. Setting a gateway on an internal interface will tag that interface’s outbound rules with route-to, and inbound rules with reply-to which will cause packets to be forwarded to the defined gateway rather than following their natural path. For WANs this is typically a good thing! For LANs it is not. Among other ill effects, it can lead to a loop of sorts where packets bounce between the firewall and the defined gateway, eventually being blocked or dropped when their TTL expires.
Gateway not set when it should be set
A gateway should usually be set on a WAN or other external-type interface settings (MPLS, IP VPN, etc.) In these cases the reply-to and route-to behavior is desired and likely required. If it is missing the packets may be blocked or dropped as they attempt to leave the wrong interface. A packet could enter via the alternate WAN, but the reply would leave by the default gateway. Similar to the effect seen when improperly using an Interface Group for WAN interfaces.
Imported from the AZTCOFW knowledge base on 2026-09-05. Historical guidance may refer to older software versions. Confirm applicability before changing a production system.
Original source ↗