<?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 Re: Assymetric Routing in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182826#M33531</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Have you considered iBGP between R1 &amp;amp; R2 ?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2023 00:19:54 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Chris_Atkinson</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-06-01T00:19:54Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Assymetric Routing</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182753#M33522</link>
      <description>&lt;DIV class="flex flex-grow flex-col gap-3"&gt;
&lt;DIV class="min-h-[20px] flex flex-col items-start gap-4 whitespace-pre-wrap break-words"&gt;
&lt;DIV class="markdown prose w-full break-words dark:prose-invert light"&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Gentlemen,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;help me choose an option to solve an issue in the following scenario: The topology is as shown below. This company is an ASN and has 2 edge routers that advertise their /23 IP block (I am using private IPs to represent).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="topology.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/21189iD70545382CE4014C/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="topology.png" alt="topology.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Currently, each router has a configured VLAN. However, due to both routers advertising the /23, it can cause packets to return through either of the two routers. The example below better illustrates what I mean.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="assym.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/21190i4036874EB6150535/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="assym.png" alt="assym.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;So what would you do in this case?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Configuring both VLANs on each router would be a solution, right? Regardless of which router the packet returns through, it would be delivered to the originating VLAN and routed back to the correct firewall interface.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="vlans.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/21191iA8586922A674C991/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="vlans.png" alt="vlans.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;To configure VRRP between the routers, it would be necessary to change the addressing of the interfaces because for using a VRRP virtual IP, both routers need to have an interface in the same network, correct? With the current scenario, each router has a /29, a different subnet, and therefore VRRP would not work, right?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;It would also be possible to configure BGP on the Check Point, correct?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;However, I personally have never done that, so what would be the recommended approach for setting up a BGP peer on the Check Point?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I appreciate your assistance!&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 May 2023 15:17:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182753#M33522</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bernardes</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-31T15:17:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Assymetric Routing</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182755#M33523</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;That sounds right, to configure same VLANs on both routers. Are these Cisco?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Andy&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 May 2023 15:19:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182755#M33523</guid>
      <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-31T15:19:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Assymetric Routing</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182765#M33527</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello &lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/38213"&gt;@the_rock&lt;/a&gt; ! These routers are Mikrotik&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 May 2023 16:24:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182765#M33527</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bernardes</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-31T16:24:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Assymetric Routing</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182767#M33528</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The only reason I know about that company is because I saw their building in Riga, Latvia : - )&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Anyway, does not change the fact they are not Cisco, I still believe in same suggesiton I gave.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Andy&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 May 2023 16:28:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182767#M33528</guid>
      <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-05-31T16:28:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Assymetric Routing</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182826#M33531</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Have you considered iBGP between R1 &amp;amp; R2 ?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2023 00:19:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182826#M33531</guid>
      <dc:creator>Chris_Atkinson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-06-01T00:19:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Assymetric Routing</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182832#M33536</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;After analyzing the possibilities, we have opted for the simplest solution that was not initially considered. Since it is a /23 that both routers will advertise, it doesn't make sense to subnet and create different VLANs on the firewall side.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Instead, we will create a single bond interface, aggregate as many physical interfaces as necessary, and assign an IP from the /29 subnet to this bond interface. This ensures that the same firewall interface will receive the return packets and avoids creating asymmetry.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="top-final.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/21202i0C221D4760D46E46/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="top-final.png" alt="top-final.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;For routing redundancy, we will configure two default routes and enable ISP redundancy in active/backup mode. For this specific scenario, we believe this is the best option. What do you think?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2023 00:38:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Assymetric-Routing/m-p/182832#M33536</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bernardes</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-06-01T00:38:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

