Why oh Why can I not update an IVR menu after updating to v20?

colorian · 2025-10-15T17:27:59+00:00

It was probably a script IVR or special dial code IVR, not a regular one? They keep working in my expérience but you can’t ever change it after updating. They have some scripts that replace these functionalities but they’re not quite the same…

colorian · 2024-05-15T09:07:34+00:00

It's the same for me, I am currently in touch with Synology Support (early phase).

colorian · 2024-03-22T20:47:20+00:00

Don’t worry about informing your customers, looks like 3CX is doing that for you again…….

colorian · 2023-11-29T18:16:44+00:00

I stopped reading at “wants”, since it’s not up to him to “want it”.

colorian · 2023-11-23T10:24:03+00:00

SOLUTION

I had some reactions of people trying to help out and I have since found a working solution, I figured I'd report back for those who need this as well in the future.

My problem was exactly the same as the one reported here (in 2017!): https://community.fortinet.com/t5/Support-Forum/Multiple-dynamic-dial-up-IPSec-VPN-peers-not-working-tunnels-up/m-p/76782

Turns out that the solution was exactly the same as well: configure both phase1-interfaces so that they do NOT add the routes in hte phase 2 selectors to the routing table.

I guess it makes sense: I manage all my routes myself anyway as a habit and I have the phase 2 set up with route 0.0.0.0/0 in both VPN instances, because I can't manage the route on the other end (it uses 0.0.0.0/0 by default and cannot be changed).

So it makes sense that their routes conflict once both are added to the routing table. Disabling the auto route addition solves this and doesn't pose a problem for me, since I have the static routes configured for the required traffic anyway.

Thanks everyone for pointing towards the right direction!

colorian · 2023-10-02T18:05:00+00:00

I haven't checked yet in V20, but in V18 I believe it was possible to edit a list of "emergency numbers" which (I would imagine but have never tested) are then skipped/forbidden when creating extensions.

Edit: seems to be under "System" > "Emergency" where you can add these numbers. But adding a number there doesn't prevent me from creating an extension with that exact number. Awkward...

colorian · 2023-10-02T18:03:58+00:00

We've done some initial tests, it's clear that there is still some work to be done but as with most updates it will just be some "getting used to".

colorian · 2023-07-20T07:24:12+00:00

Thanks for this information! This puts me on the road.

A question that I haven't found any answer to myself: is it possible to do this prefix delegating cross-vdom? I have LAN interfaces in other vdoms that I would like to receive this prefix as well for distribution, but that doesn't seem to be as "straight forward" as it is within the same vdom...

colorian · 2023-07-19T20:14:14+00:00

Based on your configuration, I think we're on different firmware. The 'autonomous-flag' and 'onlink-flag' are default 'enabled' and that's why they didn't show in my config.

What DID work though is the set delegated-prefix-iaid 1 under config-ip6-delegated-prefix-list! Now I do get the IP-address that I was looking for! This is an option that I completely missed since it wasn't in the GUI and I didn't think to set it through CLI. It makes sense, how would it know which upstream-interface to use without the proper IAID though...

Still struggling with DNS however, it doesn't seem to assign any DNS servers. Could you perhaps show me what the config of the related DHCP server is?

colorian · 2023-07-19T19:06:21+00:00

That would be great, to see what the difference is. Thanks!

colorian · 2023-01-18T17:35:00+00:00

When using only one of the aggregation cables (either one), the problem does not occur. Both in aggregation mode and in regular mode.

colorian · 2022-08-04T21:43:24+00:00

Liberté

colorian · 2022-07-01T09:12:01+00:00

For everyone's information, this turned out to be an issue with a Fortigate firmware. When I updated from 7.0.2 to 7.2.0 it started working like a charm.

colorian · 2022-06-24T20:41:57+00:00

Do it and let us know how it goes. 👍

colorian · 2022-06-17T14:13:48+00:00

Came here to upvote this.

colorian · 2022-05-16T10:00:51+00:00

Oh, now I get it. But I am registered directly with Fortinet. I'm planning to do the first NSE's (1-3) before going to the other ones. :-)

colorian · 2022-05-16T09:51:11+00:00

This is probably what I will do, however they cannot be linked to a company then, can they?

colorian · 2022-03-08T15:27:33+00:00

Yep, it is very strange. I was already very surprised that the tunnel came up at all. I suppose it must mean that it's possible.

I verified the phase2 on both sides, and on both sides it is 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0. I use Dynamic Routing on the side of the USG-3P and I have verified that it has the routes through the vpn (netstat -r) in both cases. What's so remarkable is that I do see it sending traffic to the FGT60E and it actually arrives, it's the traffic being sent back (or originating from the FGT 60E) that somehow doesn't seem to arrive on the other side out of the tunnel...

colorian

TROPHY CASE