<?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 VPN question in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VPN-question/m-p/207416#M39228</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hey guys,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Apologize if this sounds like a really dumb question, but anyway, here it comes &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Scenario...cluster with ISPR configured, so we need to create 4 vpn tunnels with Azure for testing, 2 for active link and 2 for backup. Question...is it SUPPORTED or even recommended to say have 2 vpn communities with SAME interoperable object IP (just a different name) and same cluster as center gateway? It did work when testing, policy succeeded, BUT, only 1 tunnel shows as UP and I guess logically its because both tunnels have same IP for interoperable object.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;So, just curious, is this something anyone has tried before and made it work? We did open TAC case for this, but figured would see what community thinks &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Best,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Andy&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2024 20:41:19 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-02-28T20:41:19Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>VPN question</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VPN-question/m-p/207416#M39228</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hey guys,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Apologize if this sounds like a really dumb question, but anyway, here it comes &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Scenario...cluster with ISPR configured, so we need to create 4 vpn tunnels with Azure for testing, 2 for active link and 2 for backup. Question...is it SUPPORTED or even recommended to say have 2 vpn communities with SAME interoperable object IP (just a different name) and same cluster as center gateway? It did work when testing, policy succeeded, BUT, only 1 tunnel shows as UP and I guess logically its because both tunnels have same IP for interoperable object.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;So, just curious, is this something anyone has tried before and made it work? We did open TAC case for this, but figured would see what community thinks &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Best,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Andy&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2024 20:41:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VPN-question/m-p/207416#M39228</guid>
      <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-02-28T20:41:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VPN question</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VPN-question/m-p/207425#M39234</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You will encounter I think this issue:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk36425" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk36425&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Also this maybe would help:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk32225" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk32225&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk92662" target="_blank"&gt;https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk92662&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2024 21:27:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VPN-question/m-p/207425#M39234</guid>
      <dc:creator>Lesley</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-02-28T21:27:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: VPN question</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VPN-question/m-p/207431#M39236</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;TAC came back saying this is not supported way of doing it, which I sort of figured, but wanted to be 100% sure. They said you essentially need separate Azure VNG for each tunnel, so 4 in our case.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Best,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Andy&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 00:15:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/VPN-question/m-p/207431#M39236</guid>
      <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-02-29T00:15:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

