<?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: Site-to-Site VPN with Static and Dynamic Routing in Next-Generation Firewall Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/site-to-site-vpn-with-static-and-dynamic-routing/m-p/569545#M2264</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/27580"&gt;@OtakarKlier&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp; I agree, the scenario is not a good example to explain the route Redistribution concept.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2023 20:58:03 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>rmeddane</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-12-12T20:58:03Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Site-to-Site VPN with Static and Dynamic Routing</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/site-to-site-vpn-with-static-and-dynamic-routing/m-p/569513#M2261</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I read the following article about Site to Site VPN With Static and Dynamic Routing.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/network-security/ipsec-vpn/administration/site-to-site-vpn-quick-configs/site-to-site-vpn-with-static-and-dynamic-routing" target="_self"&gt;https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/network-security/ipsec-vpn/administration/site-to-site-vpn-quick-configs/site-to-site-vpn-with-static-and-dynamic-routing&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The article says that the Satellite Site uses static Routing so the VPN Peer A has a static routes toward the Office LAN subnets let's say 172.16.101.0/24 as shown in the topology. And the Regional office Sie uses OSPF Routing Protocol.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The VPN Site to Site is configured between VPN Peer A and VPN Peer B.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;A tunnel interface is configured on both palo alto firewalls.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Then OSPF Routing Protocol is implemented between VPN Peer A and VPN Peer B through the Tunnel VPN in area 1.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Finally the VPN Peer B was configured to redistribute the static route to 172.16.101.0/24 into OSPF domain to ensure end to end connectivity.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;From the scenario explained in the article, we conclude that both VPN Peer A and VPN Peer B are running different routing mechanisms, STATIC Routing and Dynamic Routing.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-center" image-alt="VPN Redi Profile 2.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/55852iF954AC24E59D6009/image-size/large/is-moderation-mode/true?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="VPN Redi Profile 2.png" alt="VPN Redi Profile 2.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Do you think that it should be better to do this once on VPN Peer A firewall only, since it has already static routes to the Satellite Subnets, so we can simply configure the VPN Peer A to redistribute these static routes into OSPF Domain as shown below without the need of adding static routes on VPN Peer B, especially in large deployment.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-center" image-alt="VPN Redi Profile 1.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/55853i8642F3C6A44D160F/image-size/large/is-moderation-mode/true?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="VPN Redi Profile 1.png" alt="VPN Redi Profile 1.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2023 17:49:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/site-to-site-vpn-with-static-and-dynamic-routing/m-p/569513#M2261</guid>
      <dc:creator>rmeddane</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-12-12T17:49:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Site-to-Site VPN with Static and Dynamic Routing</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/site-to-site-vpn-with-static-and-dynamic-routing/m-p/569542#M2263</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Yeah they made it very complicated in the article on purpose. I prefer OSPF where applicable and static if I have to or need to.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Cheers.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2023 20:29:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/site-to-site-vpn-with-static-and-dynamic-routing/m-p/569542#M2263</guid>
      <dc:creator>OtakarKlier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-12-12T20:29:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Site-to-Site VPN with Static and Dynamic Routing</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/site-to-site-vpn-with-static-and-dynamic-routing/m-p/569545#M2264</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/27580"&gt;@OtakarKlier&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp; I agree, the scenario is not a good example to explain the route Redistribution concept.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2023 20:58:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/site-to-site-vpn-with-static-and-dynamic-routing/m-p/569545#M2264</guid>
      <dc:creator>rmeddane</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-12-12T20:58:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

