failover between sites

cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Palo Alto Networks Approved
Palo Alto Networks Approved
Community Expert Verified
Community Expert Verified

failover between sites

L4 Transporter

Hi,

 

 

Hi ,

 

I have two sites , between sites layer 3 connection is there .single firewall deployed in each site .Now I want to  make active standby with these firewalls .

How can I do that , does it work without any problem ?

What need to be dome to make it work 

 

site to site.JPG

Thanks 

4 REPLIES 4

Cyber Elite
Cyber Elite

Hello,

Is this for internal users going out or outside services that are hosted, ie websites?

Regards,

Hi,

 

Internet access for LAN users  and hosted services 

 

Thanks

Cyber Elite
Cyber Elite

Hello,

Using a dynamic routing protocol such as OSPF should accomplish what you are looking for. It will distribute the routes based on metrics. Make the metrics between the datacenters say 10000, that way the default (internet outbound) routes are always going to point to their respective data center firewalls. And in case of a failure of a firewall, the traffic will be routed via the wan link to the other firewall.

 

Regards,

Hey @simsim ,

- As described in this document  https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/pan-os/9-1/pan-os-admin/high-availability/ha-concepts/ha-links-and... Control Link (HA1) and Data Link (HA2) can use layer3 and if you route the two networks between sites, the two firewall will should be able to establish HA cluster.

 

There is one problem: - PAN FWs in Active/Passive cluster are sharing interface addresses, which means you need the networks between FW and core to use the same addressing on both side - you cannot assign different network/addresses on the passive member.

 

From top of my head, I believe you can achieve what you want, but I wouldn't prefer this approach, lots of complications and confusing setup and it is possible to have some issues with HA traffic.

 

I would also suggest you to consider @OtakarKlier  proposal and use standalone firewalls with dynamic routing. You still can have "active/passive", by always preferring the routes from FW1 and failover to FW2 only when routes from FW1 are unavailable.

The biggest challenge with this approach is that you have to keep the rules consistence between the two firewalls. I would recommend to use Panorama and manage both firewalls with the same device group. Of course if you don't have panorama at the moment your budged may be a problem.

 

(believe me configuring same rules manually on separate firewall is complete nightmare - I have inherited two similar firewalls and I haven't managed to fix all the mess of missing rules between the two firewalls)

 

 

 

  • 2314 Views
  • 4 replies
  • 0 Likes
Like what you see?

Show your appreciation!

Click Like if a post is helpful to you or if you just want to show your support.

Click Accept as Solution to acknowledge that the answer to your question has been provided.

The button appears next to the replies on topics you’ve started. The member who gave the solution and all future visitors to this topic will appreciate it!

These simple actions take just seconds of your time, but go a long way in showing appreciation for community members and the LIVEcommunity as a whole!

The LIVEcommunity thanks you for your participation!