Active/Passive connection with Cisco Stack switches

[JeromeC]

Hello

I would like to have confirmation. I need to connect my Palo Alto cluster firewall (active/passive) to a Cisco stack (with 2 members). 

If I want a fully redundancy, I need to create, on a each firewall, an aggregate with 2 interfaces and each interface is connected on a port on each Cisco member ? Are you agree with my schema bellow ? 

BR

Jerome

[PavelK]

Hello @JeromeC

this connection design is functional. Cisco switches in stack act like a single switch, so on switch side it is cross stack ether channel and Palo Alto Firewall will see its AE as if it is connected to a single switch.

Kind Regards

Pavel

[JeromeC]

Hello

I'm not sure to understand. It's not necessary to have one physical connection from active FW to each Cisco member to keep the communication up even if the Cisco member where the phiscal cable is connected is down ? Even in this case, the communication between firewall and equipments connected on the stack will continue to be OK ?

BR

[OtakarKlier]

Hello,

Yes this should work for you. Just could cause a delay in failing over since the MAC of the Firewall changes but the IP doesnt.

Regards,

[tcasw86]

Yes, I have used this topology frequently when setting up new firewalls. On the firewall you will want to set up a link monitoring group and set failover to happen only when both links to the switches fail.

[Zaid89]

Hi, thanks for the info
So if I have A/P palo alto setup. each firewall with single down connection to core switch cluster. do I need a link monitoring group or a port channel from each firewall to each core switch for that or a single link would do since AP firewall and core switches are acting as one>?