<?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: VRRP between VSs on different VSX clusters in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193829#M36030</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;For a list of supported features on VSX please refer sk79700&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2023 23:31:32 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Chris_Atkinson</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-09-28T23:31:32Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>VRRP between VSs on different VSX clusters</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193750#M36003</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is it possible to use VRRP on Check Point between VSs on different VSX clusters?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Reason:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have 2 datacenters. Each has its own VSX cluster, managed from different CMA. Behind Check Point is NSX stretched deployment, and NSX management VLAN is L3 terminated on one of VSs. We would like to use VRRP address for default gateway in NSX management, so if one cluster/DC fails, we will not lose management connectivity to other site, and other site will be able to communicate with witness server (on separate location).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So basically we don't want to use it as clustering method. We want only benefit of sharing Virtual IP between two separate VSs for default gateway.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks in advance!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards&lt;BR /&gt;--&lt;BR /&gt;Marko&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2023 10:59:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193750#M36003</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marko_Keca</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-09-28T10:59:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VRRP between VSs on different VSX clusters</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193783#M36018</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;This is not possible.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Separately, spanning a layer 2 domain between datacenters is a &lt;EM&gt;really bad&lt;/EM&gt; idea from an availability design perspective. Complicated low levels lead to problems which are extremely hard to debug at higher levels.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2023 14:58:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193783#M36018</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bob_Zimmerman</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-09-28T14:58:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VRRP between VSs on different VSX clusters</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193804#M36024</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;VRRP is not supported on VSX.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2023 19:16:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193804#M36024</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-09-28T19:16:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VRRP between VSs on different VSX clusters</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193829#M36030</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;For a list of supported features on VSX please refer sk79700&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2023 23:31:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193829#M36030</guid>
      <dc:creator>Chris_Atkinson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-09-28T23:31:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VRRP between VSs on different VSX clusters</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193830#M36031</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you all for the answers!&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Would it be possible if we have two non-VSX clusters?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;--&lt;BR /&gt;Marko&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2023 23:44:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193830#M36031</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marko_Keca</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-09-28T23:44:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VRRP between VSs on different VSX clusters</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193837#M36032</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Gaia supports VRRP for non-VSX, but it's primarily tied to ClusterXL.&lt;BR /&gt;Not sure this will work the way you expect.&lt;BR /&gt;It's definitely not a good design, as&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/27871"&gt;@Bob_Zimmerman&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;pointed out.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Sep 2023 02:16:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VRRP-between-VSs-on-different-VSX-clusters/m-p/193837#M36032</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-09-29T02:16:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

