<?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 I have concern in SDWAN, Kindly help out this. in Advanced SD-WAN for NGFW Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/advanced-sd-wan-for-ngfw/i-have-concern-in-sdwan-kindly-help-out-this/m-p/1246355#M51</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;1.&amp;nbsp; Currently, four tunnels (at each of the two Hubs) are used for the four IPsec tunnels between these two Hubs (based on two SDWAN circuits at each Hub).&amp;nbsp; Can the four existing tunnels (labelled tunnel.50xx) at both existing hubs (CHT and ELP) be used for the new IPsec tunnels to/from Agave2?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2. Can we use IP addresses assigned directly to interface ports for the SDWAN circuits, instead of creating loopback interfaces for IKE Gateways ?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;3.If there is another valid reason to use loopback interfaces instead of the IP addresses assigned to the physical interface?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;4.After removing Agave2 firewall (as a branch) from SDWAN cluster and device in Panorama, and creating the necessary manual IPSec tunnels between Hubs, at what point do we create add the Agave2 back to SDWAN --&amp;gt; Device as a Hub, and add it to SDWAN --&amp;gt; Cluster?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;please help me out this.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2026 05:55:45 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>rajasekark1506</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2026-01-23T05:55:45Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>I have concern in SDWAN, Kindly help out this.</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/advanced-sd-wan-for-ngfw/i-have-concern-in-sdwan-kindly-help-out-this/m-p/1246355#M51</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;1.&amp;nbsp; Currently, four tunnels (at each of the two Hubs) are used for the four IPsec tunnels between these two Hubs (based on two SDWAN circuits at each Hub).&amp;nbsp; Can the four existing tunnels (labelled tunnel.50xx) at both existing hubs (CHT and ELP) be used for the new IPsec tunnels to/from Agave2?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2. Can we use IP addresses assigned directly to interface ports for the SDWAN circuits, instead of creating loopback interfaces for IKE Gateways ?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;3.If there is another valid reason to use loopback interfaces instead of the IP addresses assigned to the physical interface?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;4.After removing Agave2 firewall (as a branch) from SDWAN cluster and device in Panorama, and creating the necessary manual IPSec tunnels between Hubs, at what point do we create add the Agave2 back to SDWAN --&amp;gt; Device as a Hub, and add it to SDWAN --&amp;gt; Cluster?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;please help me out this.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2026 05:55:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/advanced-sd-wan-for-ngfw/i-have-concern-in-sdwan-kindly-help-out-this/m-p/1246355#M51</guid>
      <dc:creator>rajasekark1506</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-01-23T05:55:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

