<?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 Check Point Application Control Policy Conversion in Expedition Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/check-point-application-control-policy-conversion/m-p/330193#M2611</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I have a client running Check Point R77 who wishes to migrate their Application Control policy.&amp;nbsp;Does Expedition support conversion of a non-unified Check Point App Control policy? The policy is defined in a separate layer (non-unified policy), unified policy was introduced in R80.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/45"&gt;@aestevez&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2020 00:49:07 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>mb_equate</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-05-28T00:49:07Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Check Point Application Control Policy Conversion</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/check-point-application-control-policy-conversion/m-p/330193#M2611</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have a client running Check Point R77 who wishes to migrate their Application Control policy.&amp;nbsp;Does Expedition support conversion of a non-unified Check Point App Control policy? The policy is defined in a separate layer (non-unified policy), unified policy was introduced in R80.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/45"&gt;@aestevez&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2020 00:49:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/check-point-application-control-policy-conversion/m-p/330193#M2611</guid>
      <dc:creator>mb_equate</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-05-28T00:49:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Check Point Application Control Policy Conversion</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/check-point-application-control-policy-conversion/m-p/330275#M2616</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Expedition does not migrate application layers from Checkpoint as the mapping between defined applications in Checkpoint and Palo Alto Networks devices is not trivial.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;We may consider this for the future, but, for the moment, we would encourage to migrate L4 policies and to use the enrichment&amp;nbsp; and AppID adoption features in Expedition to determine the correct AppIDs that need to be applied&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2020 13:10:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/expedition-discussions/check-point-application-control-policy-conversion/m-p/330275#M2616</guid>
      <dc:creator>dgildelaig</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-05-28T13:10:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

