<?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: Dual dynamic ISP with single VR in Next-Generation Firewall Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/dual-dynamic-isp-with-single-vr/m-p/513378#M332</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;With Dynamic Public IPs for the ISPs it would be preferable to use FQDNs and something like DynDNS to keep them update, otherwise every time your IPs change you will need to update the VPN peering, but that doesn't sound like the issue here.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Does the Tunnel &lt;EM&gt;ever&lt;/EM&gt; establish on the failover ISP? Does Phase 1 establish, but not phase 2? Are you getting any log messages on either side of the tunnel indicating what the issue could be related to?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2022 17:42:54 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>tcasw86</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2022-08-30T17:42:54Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Dual dynamic ISP with single VR</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/dual-dynamic-isp-with-single-vr/m-p/513101#M312</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi , have 2 dynamic isp at site 1 with single vr and &amp;nbsp;ECMP and 1 public ip at site 2 paloalto at OCI cloud , i have setup dual tunnels from site 1 to site 2 but its not stable at all and most of times if we simulate failover using either path monitoring or tunnel monitoring we can see that vpn is stuck in initiating phase. We used below guide&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://knowledgebase.paloaltonetworks.com/KCSArticleDetail?id=kA10g000000POO0CAO" target="_blank"&gt;https://knowledgebase.paloaltonetworks.com/KCSArticleDetail?id=kA10g000000POO0CAO&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2022 09:49:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/dual-dynamic-isp-with-single-vr/m-p/513101#M312</guid>
      <dc:creator>mhm_ameen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-08-26T09:49:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Dual dynamic ISP with single VR</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/dual-dynamic-isp-with-single-vr/m-p/513321#M327</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;To clarify, do you mean you are dynamic public IP with each ISP? If so are you using a domain name for OCI FW to peer to the site?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2022 22:52:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/dual-dynamic-isp-with-single-vr/m-p/513321#M327</guid>
      <dc:creator>tcasw86</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-08-29T22:52:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Dual dynamic ISP with single VR</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/dual-dynamic-isp-with-single-vr/m-p/513339#M328</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;thx for reply, yes i have 2 dynamic ip at 1 site and public&amp;nbsp; ip at other site ,&amp;nbsp; not using domin name but using FQDN for dynamic peer&amp;nbsp; in ike gateway,&amp;nbsp; i will attach diagram.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;FQDN iam using is ip address is it ok or it must be in form of name.domain.com ??&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2022 07:03:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/dual-dynamic-isp-with-single-vr/m-p/513339#M328</guid>
      <dc:creator>mhm_ameen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-08-30T07:03:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Dual dynamic ISP with single VR</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/dual-dynamic-isp-with-single-vr/m-p/513378#M332</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;With Dynamic Public IPs for the ISPs it would be preferable to use FQDNs and something like DynDNS to keep them update, otherwise every time your IPs change you will need to update the VPN peering, but that doesn't sound like the issue here.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Does the Tunnel &lt;EM&gt;ever&lt;/EM&gt; establish on the failover ISP? Does Phase 1 establish, but not phase 2? Are you getting any log messages on either side of the tunnel indicating what the issue could be related to?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2022 17:42:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/dual-dynamic-isp-with-single-vr/m-p/513378#M332</guid>
      <dc:creator>tcasw86</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-08-30T17:42:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

