i have proxy in my network which is responsible for all filtering and categorizaing , also i bought a licnese for url filtering on paloalto so, is there any benefit to allow filtering and categoriziang on both ?
or no need for filtering on paloalto since i have proxy
the question may be do you have need for the proxy? what is it doing that the palo can't do? I don't believe it makes sense to have both performing policy based on URL categorization because unless they're both using bright cloud as a source, there's a good chance they won't always agree and that may cause confusion.
From my experiance nothing that I've used a proxy for in the past couldn't be accomplished with the Palo Alto besides...the ability to limit users to 'x' amount of time on a category or specific website. Keeping an existing proxy and utilizing the PA URL filtering and categorization would simply add complexity in troubleshooting any issues.
also what I should have noted before, is if you do have a proxy in front of the palo alto, unless you enable X-Forward-For support on the proxy, the Palo will see the Proxy's IP as the source for all traffic which can lead to additional confusion/headaches, especially when it comes to content-id. If you enable XFF, the PA will use the original client's IP in the logs. Just be sure to enable stripping the XFF in the content ID setup otherwise it can/will leak corporate IPs to the internet, which may or may not be a concern.
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!