<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Azure NGFW active-active HA and Panorama requirements in VM-Series in the Public Cloud</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/azure-ngfw-active-active-ha-and-panorama-requirements/m-p/347902#M944</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have configured HA on Azure, but it turns out that is not the best setup. You don't need a loadbalancer (and therefore no additional virtual router if you have more than one interface behind a loadbalancer).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Unfortunately the failover (regardless of triggered manual or due to an failure) is very slow. The command "hey Azure, shift IP from from interface A to interface B" is triggered immediately. In our environment (trusted, untrusted + two additional IPs with public IP) it typically takes 3 up to 5 Minutes until the failover is completed.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2020 14:53:27 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>JoergSchuetter</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-09-09T14:53:27Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Azure NGFW active-active HA and Panorama requirements</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/azure-ngfw-active-active-ha-and-panorama-requirements/m-p/347462#M941</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi, we're currently evaluating the use of NGFW's for a new Azure deployment.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ideally, we need to deploy NGFW in an active-active HA pattern behind an Azure internal load balancer.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The &lt;A href="https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/vm-series/9-1/vm-series-deployment/set-up-the-vm-series-firewall-on-azure/autoscaling-the-vm-series-firewall-on-azure.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;documentation&lt;/A&gt; appears to state that Panorama is required to support this configuration. Is this a hard requirement? Is it possible to enable active-active with Config sync without Panorama?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2020 12:28:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/azure-ngfw-active-active-ha-and-panorama-requirements/m-p/347462#M941</guid>
      <dc:creator>andrewkelleher</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-08T12:28:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Azure NGFW active-active HA and Panorama requirements</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/azure-ngfw-active-active-ha-and-panorama-requirements/m-p/347899#M943</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Andrew,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;we talking here about two different things. the documentation is talking about Azure Autoscaling no we didnt use here a native HA configuration both firewalls are working independently. the is no Session Sync. the Panorama is taking care here about the increase and decrease of VM-Instances inside the VMSS and this is done via the AppInsight Metrics.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;the Native HA configuration is working in Azure but without a Loabbalancer in the Front or Back. look here about the Setup&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/vm-series/9-0/vm-series-deployment/set-up-the-vm-series-firewall-on-azure/configure-activepassive-ha-for-vm-series-firewall-on-azure.html" target="_blank"&gt;https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/vm-series/9-0/vm-series-deployment/set-up-the-vm-series-firewall-on-azure/configure-activepassive-ha-for-vm-series-firewall-on-azure.html&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I hope that helped you?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Torsten&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2020 14:22:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/azure-ngfw-active-active-ha-and-panorama-requirements/m-p/347899#M943</guid>
      <dc:creator>tostern</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-09T14:22:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Azure NGFW active-active HA and Panorama requirements</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/azure-ngfw-active-active-ha-and-panorama-requirements/m-p/347902#M944</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have configured HA on Azure, but it turns out that is not the best setup. You don't need a loadbalancer (and therefore no additional virtual router if you have more than one interface behind a loadbalancer).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Unfortunately the failover (regardless of triggered manual or due to an failure) is very slow. The command "hey Azure, shift IP from from interface A to interface B" is triggered immediately. In our environment (trusted, untrusted + two additional IPs with public IP) it typically takes 3 up to 5 Minutes until the failover is completed.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2020 14:53:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/azure-ngfw-active-active-ha-and-panorama-requirements/m-p/347902#M944</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoergSchuetter</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-09T14:53:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Azure NGFW active-active HA and Panorama requirements</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/azure-ngfw-active-active-ha-and-panorama-requirements/m-p/347904#M945</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Jörg,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;thats correct and thats a normal behaviour in Azure. The Problem here is the API call from Azure to detach and attach the interface.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Torsten&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2020 15:10:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/vm-series-in-the-public-cloud/azure-ngfw-active-active-ha-and-panorama-requirements/m-p/347904#M945</guid>
      <dc:creator>tostern</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-09T15:10:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

