<?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 Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587465#M117206</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;After upgrading PA-220 from 9.1.18 to 10.2.x previously "healthy" Tunnel and Path monitors for VPN tunnels were up and down, constantly re-keying on the remote end.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;We managed to solve the re-keying issue (only IPSec was a problem, not the IKE), and removed one of the monitoring solutions - tunnel monitoring as requested by PA TAC, with only Path monitoring left, each of the primary ISP-based tunnels been actively monitored.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Each remote end has two endpoints for redundancy, so we have 6x tunnels total - two for each geo-location for each ISP provider.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I question whether all six path monitors should have active PATH monitoring enabled or only one of the two for each location—three total—to keep static routes under control.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2 CLDW1 -&amp;gt; path monitor enabled&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLDW2&amp;nbsp;-&amp;gt; path monitor enabled?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLDE1&amp;nbsp;-&amp;gt; path monitor enabled&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLDE2&amp;nbsp;-&amp;gt; path monitor enabled?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLDC1&amp;nbsp;-&amp;gt; path monitor enabled&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLDC2&amp;nbsp;-&amp;gt; path monitor enabled?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I appreciate the constructive input.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 20:45:44 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Alexander.Usach</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-05-21T20:45:44Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587465#M117206</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;After upgrading PA-220 from 9.1.18 to 10.2.x previously "healthy" Tunnel and Path monitors for VPN tunnels were up and down, constantly re-keying on the remote end.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;We managed to solve the re-keying issue (only IPSec was a problem, not the IKE), and removed one of the monitoring solutions - tunnel monitoring as requested by PA TAC, with only Path monitoring left, each of the primary ISP-based tunnels been actively monitored.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Each remote end has two endpoints for redundancy, so we have 6x tunnels total - two for each geo-location for each ISP provider.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I question whether all six path monitors should have active PATH monitoring enabled or only one of the two for each location—three total—to keep static routes under control.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2 CLDW1 -&amp;gt; path monitor enabled&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLDW2&amp;nbsp;-&amp;gt; path monitor enabled?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLDE1&amp;nbsp;-&amp;gt; path monitor enabled&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLDE2&amp;nbsp;-&amp;gt; path monitor enabled?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLDC1&amp;nbsp;-&amp;gt; path monitor enabled&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLDC2&amp;nbsp;-&amp;gt; path monitor enabled?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I appreciate the constructive input.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 20:45:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587465#M117206</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alexander.Usach</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-21T20:45:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587468#M117207</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Dont think you need path monitoring on the secondary VPN. If its down and the primary is up, there is nothing to fail over to. However I would add a metric cost to the secondary VPN path so its not desired by the firewall. This way you get failover if primary fails and fail back once its back online.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://knowledgebase.paloaltonetworks.com/KCSArticleDetail?id=kA10g000000PLL8CAO" target="_blank"&gt;https://knowledgebase.paloaltonetworks.com/KCSArticleDetail?id=kA10g000000PLL8CAO&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Hope that makes sense.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 21:42:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587468#M117207</guid>
      <dc:creator>OtakarKlier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-21T21:42:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587470#M117209</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;OtakarKlier, thank you for your comment. Yes, different metrics are used for all routes.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLD1 metric 10 - Primary ISP&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLD2 metric 15&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;------------------------------&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;OPT2CLD1 metric 20&amp;nbsp; - Secondary ISP&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;OPT2CLD2 metric 25&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;My question is, do I still Path Monitor each route in the tunnel set or only one of them?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLD1 metric 10 w/Path Monitor to the NET1&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLD2 metric 15 with or without Path Monitor to the NET1?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 21:51:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587470#M117209</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alexander.Usach</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-21T21:51:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587472#M117210</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;For the metrics, increase your numbers for the secondary VPN.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Default is 10 so thats your primary, make the secondary like 100 or 200. All the metric is telling the device is that its 'less' preferred. It doesnt slow the traffic down.&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Dont path monitor your second path. It doesnt need it since there is nothing to fail over to if it goes down.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Also to clarify you have 3 different end points: each with two VPN's with two different ISP's?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 21:58:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587472#M117210</guid>
      <dc:creator>OtakarKlier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-21T21:58:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587475#M117212</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Only Primary ISP connections are Path Monitored.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Increasing the metric is a possible option, in my case&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;routes to NET1 would look like this?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLD1 metric 10 - Primary ISP&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;WAN2CLD2 metric 60&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;------------------------------&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;OPT2CLD1 metric 20&amp;nbsp; - Secondary ISP&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;OPT2CLD2 metric 70&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 22:12:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587475#M117212</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alexander.Usach</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-21T22:12:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587477#M117213</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;About the endpoints,&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Each of three endpoints has two redundant VPN tunnels in the cloud, with two ISPs at the remote (PA) end, it makes it six in total 3x pairs for each ISP&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 22:22:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587477#M117213</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alexander.Usach</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-21T22:22:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587662#M117227</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Perhaps I am having a hard time to visualize this. Its it something like:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="OtakarKlier_0-1716392312271.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/59991i47266E499911ECB9/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="OtakarKlier_0-1716392312271.png" alt="OtakarKlier_0-1716392312271.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2024 15:43:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587662#M117227</guid>
      <dc:creator>OtakarKlier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-22T15:43:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587677#M117231</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;more like that&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-inline" image-alt="AlexanderUsach_1-1716398498111.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/59998i68B2C3E9B2BBBFA0/image-size/medium/is-moderation-mode/true?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="AlexanderUsach_1-1716398498111.png" alt="AlexanderUsach_1-1716398498111.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2024 17:22:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587677#M117231</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alexander.Usach</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-22T17:22:05Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587678#M117232</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Ah gotcha, so I think I would do something like the following:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Primary WAN - First VPN Tunnel Metric 10, Second VPN tunnel Metric 100&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Secondary OPT - First VPN tunnel Metric 200, Secondary VPN tunnel Metric 300&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Also make sure you have BFD, bi-directional forwarding disabled. Also on the NET1 router, make sure your static routes point back down the correct tunnels. That way you dont get asymetic routing. I think your metrics are too close together.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Also just a question, why have two tunnels via the same ISP? Perhaps I am missing more info here.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2024 17:33:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587678#M117232</guid>
      <dc:creator>OtakarKlier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-22T17:33:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587679#M117233</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;However, two tunnels from the Primary ISP interface with different metrics, 10 and 70, show different encap/decap counts. We expect all encap and decap on tunnel1 as it is "AS" in the FIB. We are having issues with end-to-end ICMP probing in this region.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;....&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;10.80.0.0/12 0.0.0.0 10 &lt;STRONG&gt;A S&lt;/STRONG&gt; tunnel.1 - PRI ISP W-endpoint IP1&lt;BR /&gt;10.80.0.0/12 0.0.0.0 70 S tunnel.2 - PRI ISP W-endpoint IP2&lt;BR /&gt;10.80.0.0/12 0.0.0.0 20 S tunnel.7 - SECOND ISP W-endpoint IP11&lt;BR /&gt;10.80.0.0/12 0.0.0.0 80 S tunnel.8 - SECOND ISP W-endpoint IP 12&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;show vpn flow tunnel-id 1&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;tunnel WAN2E1&lt;BR /&gt;id: 1&lt;BR /&gt;type: IPSec&lt;BR /&gt;gateway id: 1&lt;BR /&gt;local ip: ccccccc&lt;BR /&gt;peer ip: yyyyyyy&lt;BR /&gt;inner interface: tunnel.1&lt;BR /&gt;outer interface: ethernet1/1&lt;BR /&gt;state: active&lt;BR /&gt;session: 46407&lt;BR /&gt;tunnel mtu: 1427&lt;BR /&gt;soft lifetime: 3569&lt;BR /&gt;hard lifetime: 3600&lt;BR /&gt;lifetime remain: 2385 sec&lt;BR /&gt;lifesize remain: N/A&lt;BR /&gt;latest rekey: 1215 seconds ago&lt;BR /&gt;monitor: off&lt;BR /&gt;monitor packets seen: 0&lt;BR /&gt;monitor packets reply:0&lt;BR /&gt;en/decap context: 615&lt;BR /&gt;local spi: F3FF42A4&lt;BR /&gt;remote spi: C8C60A2C&lt;BR /&gt;key type: auto key&lt;BR /&gt;protocol: ESP&lt;BR /&gt;auth algorithm: SHA1&lt;BR /&gt;enc algorithm: AES128&lt;BR /&gt;anti replay check: yes&lt;BR /&gt;anti replay window: 1024&lt;BR /&gt;copy tos: no&lt;BR /&gt;enable gre encap: no&lt;BR /&gt;initiator: no&lt;BR /&gt;authentication errors: 0&lt;BR /&gt;decryption errors: 0&lt;BR /&gt;inner packet warnings: 0&lt;BR /&gt;replay packets: 0&lt;BR /&gt;packets received&lt;BR /&gt;when lifetime expired:0&lt;BR /&gt;when lifesize expired:0&lt;BR /&gt;sending sequence: 9286&lt;BR /&gt;receive sequence: 0&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;encap packets: 1319141&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;decap packets: 0&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;encap bytes: 1380852888&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;decap bytes: 0&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;key acquire requests: 1&lt;BR /&gt;owner state: 0&lt;BR /&gt;owner cpuid: s1dp0&lt;BR /&gt;ownership: 1&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;show vpn flow tunnel-id 2&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;tunnel WAN2E2&lt;BR /&gt;id: 2&lt;BR /&gt;type: IPSec&lt;BR /&gt;gateway id: 2&lt;BR /&gt;local ip: ccccccc&lt;BR /&gt;peer ip: yyyyyyy&lt;BR /&gt;inner interface: tunnel.2&lt;BR /&gt;outer interface: ethernet1/1&lt;BR /&gt;state: active&lt;BR /&gt;session: 45593&lt;BR /&gt;tunnel mtu: 1427&lt;BR /&gt;soft lifetime: 3575&lt;BR /&gt;hard lifetime: 3600&lt;BR /&gt;lifetime remain: 1080 sec&lt;BR /&gt;lifesize remain: N/A&lt;BR /&gt;latest rekey: 2520 seconds ago&lt;BR /&gt;monitor: off&lt;BR /&gt;monitor packets seen: 0&lt;BR /&gt;monitor packets reply:0&lt;BR /&gt;en/decap context: 332&lt;BR /&gt;local spi: 9FFCBA57&lt;BR /&gt;remote spi: C50623FD&lt;BR /&gt;key type: auto key&lt;BR /&gt;protocol: ESP&lt;BR /&gt;auth algorithm: SHA1&lt;BR /&gt;enc algorithm: AES128&lt;BR /&gt;anti replay check: yes&lt;BR /&gt;anti replay window: 1024&lt;BR /&gt;copy tos: no&lt;BR /&gt;enable gre encap: no&lt;BR /&gt;initiator: no&lt;BR /&gt;authentication errors: 0&lt;BR /&gt;decryption errors: 0&lt;BR /&gt;inner packet warnings: 0&lt;BR /&gt;replay packets: 0&lt;BR /&gt;packets received&lt;BR /&gt;when lifetime expired:0&lt;BR /&gt;when lifesize expired:0&lt;BR /&gt;sending sequence: 839&lt;BR /&gt;receive sequence: 2676&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;encap packets: 58074&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;decap packets: 273829&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;encap bytes: 6968880&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;decap bytes: 32166648&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;key acquire requests: 1&lt;BR /&gt;owner state: 0&lt;BR /&gt;owner cpuid: s1dp0&lt;BR /&gt;ownership: 1&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2024 17:39:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587679#M117233</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alexander.Usach</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-22T17:39:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587681#M117234</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We do not have controls on the Cloud provider's end. They always make 2x Tunnels for each VPN connection to allow redundancy and flexibility to reset the tunnels at will - move to a different host, etc.- without distracting the VPN connection.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2024 17:54:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587681#M117234</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alexander.Usach</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-22T17:54:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587683#M117235</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I think your metric values are too close together as the value can be from&amp;nbsp;1 to 65,535. For something like this I typically use OSPD and use metrics in the thousands, ie for my preferred route, the default metric, for the secondary route, use metric 10000. This guarantees the proper path is taken. For your situation, perhaps something like:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;10.80.0.0/12 0.0.0.0 &lt;STRONG&gt;10&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;A S&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;tunnel.1 - PRI ISP W-endpoint IP1&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;This will be used 1st&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;10.80.0.0/12 0.0.0.0 &lt;STRONG&gt;5000&lt;/STRONG&gt; S tunnel.2 - PRI ISP W-endpoint IP2&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;This will be used 3rd&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;10.80.0.0/12 0.0.0.0 &lt;STRONG&gt;1000&lt;/STRONG&gt; S tunnel.7 - SECOND ISP W-endpoint IP11&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; This will be used 2nd&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;10.80.0.0/12 0.0.0.0 &lt;STRONG&gt;10000&lt;/STRONG&gt; S tunnel.8 - SECOND ISP W-endpoint IP 12&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;This will be used 4th&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;This way traffic from Primary WAN firewall to NET1 will go via tunnel.1&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;on the Net1 firewall so the same thing:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;0.0.0.0/0 &lt;STRONG&gt;10&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;A S&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;tunnel.1 - PRI ISP Pri-WAN&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;This will be used 1st&lt;BR /&gt;0.0.0.0/0 &lt;STRONG&gt;5000&lt;/STRONG&gt; S tunnel.2 - PRI ISP Pri-WAN2&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;This will be used 1st&lt;BR /&gt;0.0.0.0/0 &lt;STRONG&gt;1000&lt;/STRONG&gt; S tunnel.7 - SECOND ISP OPT&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; This will be used 1st&lt;BR /&gt;0.0.0.0/0 &lt;STRONG&gt;10000&lt;/STRONG&gt; S tunnel.8 - SECOND ISP Opt2&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; This will be used 1st&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2024 17:57:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587683#M117235</guid>
      <dc:creator>OtakarKlier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-22T17:57:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587684#M117236</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;we do not use PBF or advanced routing engines... so I can't disable&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN&gt;bi-directional forwarding? TY!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2024 17:58:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587684#M117236</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alexander.Usach</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-22T17:58:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587692#M117238</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks a lot, OtakarKlier, for constructive feedback.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2024 18:26:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587692#M117238</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alexander.Usach</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-22T18:26:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Static routing and VPN tunnels failover/monitoring configuration with Dual ISP implementation</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587696#M117239</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I hope this works for you as the this still might cause asymmetric routing, eg the cloud provider sending traffic down the incorrect tunnel. When I do this, I utilize Policy Based Forwarding, however since you have two sites, I'm not sure how your WAN and OPT devices share routing info and this can also cause issues.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Please let us know if this worked or if you have additional questions.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Cheers!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2024 18:29:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/static-routing-and-vpn-tunnels-failover-monitoring-configuration/m-p/587696#M117239</guid>
      <dc:creator>OtakarKlier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-22T18:29:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

