PDA

View Full Version : ERROR in execval: optimization disabled: displacement too large



mjensen
2019-01-21, 10:44
Hello,

Has anyone seen this message before after installing a policy? - "ERROR in execval: optimization disabled: displacement too large"

My SMS is running R80.10 and the security gateways are on R77.30

I have done some research and have not found anything that can resolve this. On CPUG the last postings were from ~ 2011.

Recent changes on the SMS include deleting a duplicate service object, disabling Application Control, and removing the "bittorrenprotocol" object in my URL filtering policies because I was receiving an error that it was a depreciated service after installing policy.

1420

ShadowPeak.com
2019-01-21, 10:53
Hello,

Has anyone seen this message before after installing a policy? - "ERROR in execval: optimization disabled: displacement too large"

My SMS is running R80.10 and the security gateways are on R77.30

I have done some research and have not found anything that can resolve this. On CPUG the last postings were from ~ 2011.

Recent changes on the SMS include deleting a duplicate service object, disabling Application Control, and removing the "bittorrenprotocol" object in my URL filtering policies because I was receiving an error that it was a depreciated service after installing policy.

1420

In the old days this message generally meant that some kind of fixed internal limit had been exceeded in regards to the policy. In recent releases most of these limits have been raised to a point that they should never be reached, so I'd imagine there is some kind of circular reference between objects/policies in your configuration, perhaps involving nested groups? Circular references can also sometimes be caused by host objects being created that have the same IP address as one of your gateway object's interfaces, do you have any of those?

mjensen
2019-02-01, 11:16
In the old days this message generally meant that some kind of fixed internal limit had been exceeded in regards to the policy. In recent releases most of these limits have been raised to a point that they should never be reached, so I'd imagine there is some kind of circular reference between objects/policies in your configuration, perhaps involving nested groups? Circular references can also sometimes be caused by host objects being created that have the same IP address as one of your gateway object's interfaces, do you have any of those?

Thank you Tim. Yes, I do have host objects that have the same IP address as gateway object's interfaces. I will start by eliminating those and see if that resolves this.

mjensen
2019-02-04, 13:00
I have a suspicion this error may be in the Application Control / URL filtering policy. I no longer use Check Point for URL filtering or Application control so I disabled those blades from all security gateways / clusters that had it enabled, however the error persists.


I noticed that under Access Control > Policy > Application ( is still present) and I still can see the URL filtering policy. (screen shot attached).
Is there a way I can delete this Application Control / URL filtering portion of my external policy?
My logic is if this is the place causing the error that if I completely remove it the error should disappear.
I can only find an option to delete the entire "External-policies".
1427