This website uses cookies essential to its operation, for analytics, and for personalized content. By continuing to browse this site, you acknowledge the use of cookies.
For details on cookie usage on our site, read our Privacy Policy
For details on cookie usage on our site, read our Privacy Policy
About vvadia
Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
- LIVEcommunity
- About vvadia
02-02-2020
5Posts
0Likes
0Solutions
Feb 02, 2020Last Visited
User
Activity
User
Profile
Latest posts by vvadia
| Subject | Views | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 6160 | 06-05-2019 06:53 AM | |
| 4451 | 11-10-2018 05:44 AM | |
| 4656 | 11-10-2018 05:36 AM | |
| 4661 | 11-10-2018 04:53 AM | |
| 4741 | 11-10-2018 04:32 AM |
Posts I Liked
| Subject | Likes | Author | Latest Post |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Like | |||
| 1 Like |
User Badges
Community Statistics
| Member Since | 11-10-2018 04:27 AM |
| Date Last Visited | 02-02-2020 02:44 PM |
| Posts | 5 |
06-05-2019
06:53 AM
Hi, I have a lab with a active/passive Palo Alto firewall setup. I have had a look at the Palo Guide for setting up OSPF at: https://knowledgebase.paloaltonetworks.com/servlet/fileField?entityId=ka10g000000D8HwAAK&field=Attachment_1__Body__s From this, it looks like it is not possible to form an OSPF neighbour with a standby firewall. The situation I am looking to avoid is waiting for OSPF neighborships to form to the standby firewall in the event the primary firewall fails. The document mentions the only workaround is to use floating static routes to carry the traffic until OSPF is established and routes learned at which point the dynamic routes will be preferred. I am trying to find a solution where I don't need to use floating static routes and there is no downtime from going to a standby firewall from active when using OSPF.
... View more
11-10-2018
05:44 AM
Actually looking at all the interfaces and sub-interfaces they all have a green/orange cog :s
... View more
11-10-2018
05:36 AM
Hi @vsys_remo Thanks for the explanation, I guess at some point someone else has changed something locally. It does seem that adding IP objects to groups is not impacted by this as I can see that has been updated locally on the firewall, only assigning a zone to an interface is impacted. For now, reading up on this, there is an element of risk to this, I don't want to be in a situation where I lose the configuration on the firewall. Strategically this does need to get fixed. However, for a tactical solution I need to get working asap, would it be ok to manually assign the sub-interface to a zone? Does this only require a save or a local commit as well?
... View more
11-10-2018
04:53 AM
Hi @Remo When I log into the firewall locally, I can see there are green & orange gears in "Interfaces" and in "zones" sections. Kind Regards,
... View more
11-10-2018
04:32 AM
Hi, I have a Palo Alto with existing security zones managed via Panorama. I need to add an existing sub-interface to an existing security zone which has been done on Panorama and committed. However, after logging into the firewall node directly the sub-interface does not show it has been assigned to the security zone. Are templates only used to make firewall nodes aware of zones and assigning interfaces, sub-interfaces to zones has to be done locally on the firewalls? I've been unable to find any clear documentation on this.
... View more
LEGAL NOTICES
Copyright 2007 - 2023 - Palo Alto Networks