<?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 Is the pbf essential for automaticlly failover in dual ISP environment？ in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/195465#M58374</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;hello guys,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Our FW is connecting to ISP lines, and we configured default route with different metric.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The metric of primary link is lower than the secondary link.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For such case, Can I have an automaticlly failover when the primary IPS line is down?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Do Ihave to create pbf and path montor?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:11:42 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>qd_056</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2018-01-17T09:11:42Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Is the pbf essential for automaticlly failover in dual ISP environment？</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/195465#M58374</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;hello guys,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Our FW is connecting to ISP lines, and we configured default route with different metric.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The metric of primary link is lower than the secondary link.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For such case, Can I have an automaticlly failover when the primary IPS line is down?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Do Ihave to create pbf and path montor?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:11:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/195465#M58374</guid>
      <dc:creator>qd_056</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-01-17T09:11:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Is the pbf essential for automaticlly failover in dual ISP environment？</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/195474#M58376</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;hi &lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/81365"&gt;@qd_056&lt;/a&gt; !&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Using a lower metric will simply tell the system to not use the higher metric until the lower metric interface goes down. If there is a 'soft' breakage (upstream issue), the interface will not go down so the metric will remain and route the packets to a now broken pipe&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Having PBF in place allows you to redirect certain (or all) sessions to one link while still using the secondary link&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;- this allows you to send non critical traffic over one link and ensure business critical applications run over your main link without getting drowned out&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;- with a monitoring profile in place you can then dynamically fall back/over to the remaining link should one fail&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:32:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/195474#M58376</guid>
      <dc:creator>reaper</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-01-17T09:32:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Is the pbf essential for automaticlly failover in dual ISP environment？</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/195475#M58377</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/7608"&gt;@reaper&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;well noted, appreciate.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:34:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/195475#M58377</guid>
      <dc:creator>qd_056</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-01-17T09:34:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Is the pbf essential for automaticlly failover in dual ISP environment？</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/195632#M58404</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;In addition to the metrics for failover be sure to configure link monitoring.&amp;nbsp; Frequently upstream failures can occur that don't bring the physical link down so the better metric route will still be active even when the ISP is not working correctly.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Link monitoring probes ip addresses across the link to insure actual internet reachability not just link up/down.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/Configuration-Articles/Link-Monitoring-and-Path-Monitoring-Behavior/ta-p/63659" target="_blank"&gt;https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/Configuration-Articles/Link-Monitoring-and-Path-Monitoring-Behavior/ta-p/63659&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2018 01:08:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/195632#M58404</guid>
      <dc:creator>pulukas</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-01-18T01:08:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Is the pbf essential for automaticlly failover in dual ISP environment？</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/195639#M58405</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/9524"&gt;@pulukas&lt;/a&gt;, thanks you.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2018 01:37:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/195639#M58405</guid>
      <dc:creator>qd_056</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-01-18T01:37:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Is the pbf essential for automaticlly failover in dual ISP environment？</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/196542#M58525</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If you are using 8.0, and for your case, you may also use the new feature 'Static Route Removal Based on Path Monitoring' instead, it's more simpler to configure than PBF.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://www.paloaltonetworks.com/documentation/80/pan-os/pan-os/networking/static-routes/static-route-removal-based-on-path-monitoring" target="_self"&gt;https://www.paloaltonetworks.com/documentation/80/pan-os/pan-os/networking/static-routes/static-route-removal-based-on-path-monitoring&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;HTH&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jan 2018 23:23:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/is-the-pbf-essential-for-automaticlly-failover-in-dual-isp/m-p/196542#M58525</guid>
      <dc:creator>khuynh</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-01-23T23:23:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

