<?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 Panorama and active/active configurations in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/panorama-and-active-active-configurations/m-p/252817#M71839</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Recently, we added more PA devices to our infrastructure and we decided to start using Panorma to manage all these devices.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So far, we haven't experienced an improvement in efficiency or user/admin friendliness.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Let me (try to) explain:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have two firewalls who are configured as an active/active setup. (No panorma yet).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;These firewalls had to use different virtual router configuration so that part could not be synced.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Whenever we needed to add policies, we could perform this on one node and let commit do the replication as well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Now, with Panorma added, things apparantly have changed but, the way I see it, not necessarily for the better.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Changes now need to happen at the Panorama (makes sense), but because of earlier mentioned virtual router situation these firewalls cannot be added together in a device group or so I'm told.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;And this means whenever a (policy) change needs to be implemented it needs to be done seperately on both firewalls through seperate push and commits?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Please help me understand this better, or explain what can be improved in this situation. To configure Panorama to help us more instead of creating more work.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:06:49 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>mvdven</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-08T08:06:49Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Panorama and active/active configurations</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/panorama-and-active-active-configurations/m-p/252817#M71839</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Recently, we added more PA devices to our infrastructure and we decided to start using Panorma to manage all these devices.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So far, we haven't experienced an improvement in efficiency or user/admin friendliness.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Let me (try to) explain:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have two firewalls who are configured as an active/active setup. (No panorma yet).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;These firewalls had to use different virtual router configuration so that part could not be synced.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Whenever we needed to add policies, we could perform this on one node and let commit do the replication as well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Now, with Panorma added, things apparantly have changed but, the way I see it, not necessarily for the better.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Changes now need to happen at the Panorama (makes sense), but because of earlier mentioned virtual router situation these firewalls cannot be added together in a device group or so I'm told.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;And this means whenever a (policy) change needs to be implemented it needs to be done seperately on both firewalls through seperate push and commits?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Please help me understand this better, or explain what can be improved in this situation. To configure Panorama to help us more instead of creating more work.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:06:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/panorama-and-active-active-configurations/m-p/252817#M71839</guid>
      <dc:creator>mvdven</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-08T08:06:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Panorama and active/active configurations</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/panorama-and-active-active-configurations/m-p/253918#M72083</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You want to look into using template stacks&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;This allows for 2 or more firewalls to have certain shared and certain not-shared config bits to still happily coexist in a single device group&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/panorama/8-0/panorama-admin/panorama-overview/centralized-firewall-configuration-and-update-management/templates-and-template-stacks" target="_blank"&gt;https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/panorama/8-0/panorama-admin/panorama-overview/centralized-firewall-configuration-and-update-management/templates-and-template-stacks&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2019 12:57:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/panorama-and-active-active-configurations/m-p/253918#M72083</guid>
      <dc:creator>reaper</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-15T12:57:05Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

