<?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: Migrating to multi-vsys environment in Next-Generation Firewall Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/migrating-to-multi-vsys-environment/m-p/591421#M3401</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;1. The shared gateway is indeed a very simplified way of providing internet access to multiple VSYS (MSP model). BGP will work, but getting anything 'fancy' to work may be a pain&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;2. yes, you've offloaded internet access to the SGW so all NAT (that is related to the internet) needs to happen there&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;3. you do indeed lose granular control in favor of a shared gateway&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;in most cases i've used just another vsys instead of a shared gateway to accomplish what you're trying to set up. it allows for more control in exchange for a little more configuration.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:30:56 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>reaper</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-07-09T08:30:56Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Migrating to multi-vsys environment</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/migrating-to-multi-vsys-environment/m-p/591371#M3400</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We recently decided to migrate to a multi-vsys environment for two of our data centers.&amp;nbsp; The main reason for this is the shared gateway feature.&amp;nbsp; We are starting to do a lot of disaster recovery planning, and need a segmented environment (with overlapping IPs), that can also share the internet connectivity.&amp;nbsp; We were just using virtual routers to segment, but that didn't give us the internet connectivity.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;So... that being said, I've started my research and testing, and have some concerns/questions:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;#1 - Regarding the shared gateway - most of the examples online that I see reference a more simple architecture with a basic internet connection.&amp;nbsp; We have multiple internet connections, and use BGP for routing.&amp;nbsp; Are there any special considerations here around this design?&amp;nbsp; And in general, BGP... any docs or KB articles anyone is familar with around this?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;#2 - I've read that all of your NAT rules need to exist in the shared gateway, is this accurate?&amp;nbsp; Just curious if anyone has designed this differently.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;#3 - We have a few (not many) policy based forwarding rules that we would actually use to send a particular type of traffic to a particular internet circuit.&amp;nbsp; But now with all internet connectivity being in the shared gateway, would my pbfs just point to the shared gateway?&amp;nbsp; Seems like I lose the granularity of picking a specific circuit.&amp;nbsp; Or should I be setting up multiple shared gateways?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Overall I like the concept of the shared gateway, but I think this would be much easier to accomplish all of this in a greenfield environment.&amp;nbsp; I've got two active data centers that will be getting migrated, and trying to avoid any "gotchas" if you know what I mean.&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;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2024 17:36:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/migrating-to-multi-vsys-environment/m-p/591371#M3400</guid>
      <dc:creator>buck1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-07-08T17:36:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Migrating to multi-vsys environment</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/migrating-to-multi-vsys-environment/m-p/591421#M3401</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;1. The shared gateway is indeed a very simplified way of providing internet access to multiple VSYS (MSP model). BGP will work, but getting anything 'fancy' to work may be a pain&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;2. yes, you've offloaded internet access to the SGW so all NAT (that is related to the internet) needs to happen there&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;3. you do indeed lose granular control in favor of a shared gateway&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;in most cases i've used just another vsys instead of a shared gateway to accomplish what you're trying to set up. it allows for more control in exchange for a little more configuration.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:30:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/migrating-to-multi-vsys-environment/m-p/591421#M3401</guid>
      <dc:creator>reaper</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-07-09T08:30:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

