<?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: Virtual Wire + vPC in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/virtual-wire-vpc/m-p/156995#M51536</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Is there a reason you don't want to go with the Active/Active vWire deployment?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 May 2017 04:10:13 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>andrew_b</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2017-05-17T04:10:13Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Virtual Wire + vPC</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/virtual-wire-vpc/m-p/156217#M51280</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I’m considering the following &amp;nbsp;( Active / Passive Virtual Wire + vPC ) configuration in my primary Datacetner. I really don’t want to lose the current vPC redundancy that I have in place today. Today I can cut, unplug, power off, kick, shutdown, and I’m still up and running that's point. I also don’t want to have to redesign my entire CORE infrastructure not to mention we’ve spent a great deal of time and money to get where we are today..! &amp;nbsp;Both CORE Routers are running HSRP between them with MPLS SLA monitoring. Losing half of my vPC due to the Active / Passive configuration isn't an issue in my scenario. Testing in the LAB has proven positive, but again that’s the LAB not Production.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2017 14:26:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/virtual-wire-vpc/m-p/156217#M51280</guid>
      <dc:creator>thaubein</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-05-11T14:26:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Virtual Wire + vPC</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/virtual-wire-vpc/m-p/156220#M51281</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="vPC.png" style="width: 800px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/9221i7D763B20942D15F1/image-size/large/is-moderation-mode/true?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="vPC.png" alt="vPC.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Virtual Wire + vPC.png" style="width: 800px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/9222i98422ECF29DA6553/image-size/large/is-moderation-mode/true?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="Virtual Wire + vPC.png" alt="Virtual Wire + vPC.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2017 14:30:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/virtual-wire-vpc/m-p/156220#M51281</guid>
      <dc:creator>thaubein</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-05-11T14:30:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Virtual Wire + vPC</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/virtual-wire-vpc/m-p/156526#M51390</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;In this setup if both PA-1 and 6K-2 failed you would have no connections.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Perhaps if your ran this it would have more resiliancy for multiple failures&lt;BR /&gt;PA-1 with 6k-1 e1/43 &amp;amp; 6k2 e1/44&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;PA-2 with 6k-1 e1/44 &amp;amp; 6k2 e1/43&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 13 May 2017 13:56:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/virtual-wire-vpc/m-p/156526#M51390</guid>
      <dc:creator>pulukas</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-05-13T13:56:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Virtual Wire + vPC</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/virtual-wire-vpc/m-p/156995#M51536</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Is there a reason you don't want to go with the Active/Active vWire deployment?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 May 2017 04:10:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/virtual-wire-vpc/m-p/156995#M51536</guid>
      <dc:creator>andrew_b</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-05-17T04:10:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

