nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Cato Cloud
- Discussions
- Best Practices
API
- Discussions
- Best Practices
Idea Hub
Community Help
- Discussions
Cato Partners
Cato SWIFTs
Discussions
Categories
Groups
Help

Visual Bugs in the UI?

Rneal1973

Anyone else struggling with visual bugs in the UI?

Created Internet FW rules for our VoIP solution to cover softphones on the LAN and hard phones on designated VoIP VLANs. I also created a VLAN supernet to make rule creation easier. My conundrum is visually the LAN and VLAN20 appear as LAN in the rule.

Additionally, I have a rule further downstream that blocks any other traffic on VLAN20 that doesn't match an upstream rule -- same visual bug.

Anyone else experiencing this?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

michaelsaw

Hi Rneal1973,

Are you able to find the source and Destination IP addresses on CMA Events matching Rule 7: "Allow Nextiva VoIP"?

Cheers

Rneal1973

Yes, I forgot to mention the rule works as intended, the traffic is allowed, visually you wouldn't expect it though -- which creates two concerns:

Unless you remember, you'll ask yourself, why is VLANx missing from the rule (potentially causing IT staff to pull their hair out on a red herring) and auditors are likely to give organizations grief over it.

I connected a physical phone, and it functions as expected on the VLAN in the screenshot. While it indicates VLAN23 for the applicable subnet (which is correct), the rule contains VLAN20 as the supernet for all VoIP VLANs. That is to say I'm expecting to see the LAN and VLAN20 supernets displayed in the rule.

As I mentioned in my prior note, the block rule for extraneous traffic that should not be allowed on those VLANs have the same visual bug. The rules work, the UI misleads.