<?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: New Check Point Manager implementation. in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123596#M75271</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I would also add, ensure there is enough bandwidth and the latency not high.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 12:07:27 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-07-12T12:07:27Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>New Check Point Manager implementation.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123582#M75267</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Dear Team,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have purchased new VM based check point Manager &lt;FONT face="arial black,avant garde" color="#0000FF"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;to achieve CP management&amp;nbsp; server redundancy&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;/FONT&gt;. Currently we have one CP Manager in production at one location (Mumbai City , in Maharashtra State) whereas we want to place or new CP Manager in another location(Chennai City, TamilNadu State).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How we can achieve this?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Current CP Manager manages around 20 GWs and connect with it ILL.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Please suggest best.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 09:08:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123582#M75267</guid>
      <dc:creator>surajshinde</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-12T09:08:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: New Check Point Manager implementation.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123588#M75268</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The &lt;A href="https://sc1.checkpoint.com/documents/R81/WebAdminGuides/EN/CP_R81_SecurityManagement_AdminGuide/Topics-SECMG/Overview-Management-High-Availability.htm?tocpath=Management%20High%20Availability%7C_____1#Overview_of_Management_High_Availability" target="_self"&gt;management HA documentation&lt;/A&gt; would be a good starting point.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P data-unlink="true"&gt;&lt;A href="https://sc1.checkpoint.com/documents/R80.10/Videos/EN/Security_mgmt/R80.10_Management_HA.mp4" target="_self"&gt;This video&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;also gives a nice overview.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:33:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123588#M75268</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ruan_Kotze</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-12T10:33:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: New Check Point Manager implementation.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123591#M75269</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you Ruan_Kotze,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Both CP Managers are different location and different subnet.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 11:09:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123591#M75269</guid>
      <dc:creator>surajshinde</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-12T11:09:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: New Check Point Manager implementation.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123592#M75270</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;It does not matter. Make sure the connectivity between them works, follow the documentation above.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 11:15:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123592#M75270</guid>
      <dc:creator>_Val_</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-12T11:15:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: New Check Point Manager implementation.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123596#M75271</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I would also add, ensure there is enough bandwidth and the latency not high.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 12:07:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123596#M75271</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-12T12:07:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: New Check Point Manager implementation.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123599#M75272</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Not critical, but nice to have.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 12:15:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123599#M75272</guid>
      <dc:creator>_Val_</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-12T12:15:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: New Check Point Manager implementation.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123601#M75273</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Agreed.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 12:21:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123601#M75273</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-12T12:21:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: New Check Point Manager implementation.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123619#M75274</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Worth noting a couple things: Management HA requires a second management license and&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;Management HA is no substitute for proper backups.&lt;BR /&gt;Provided you’ve taken appropriate backups, you can rebuild your management server if necessary.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;See:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk108902&amp;amp;partition=Basic&amp;amp;product=All" target="_blank"&gt;https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk108902&amp;amp;partition=Basic&amp;amp;product=All&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;And:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk156072&amp;amp;partition=Basic&amp;amp;product=Multi-Domain" target="_blank"&gt;https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk156072&amp;amp;partition=Basic&amp;amp;product=Multi-Domain&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 15:57:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/123619#M75274</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-12T15:57:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: New Check Point Manager implementation.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/124733#M75275</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you All. It works fine.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But one challenge i am facing, We have test failover and when primary Check Point Manager down in that case we need to manual &lt;STRONG&gt;Active&lt;/STRONG&gt; secondary Check Point manager then it act with read/write permission.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Once primary came&lt;STRONG&gt; UP&lt;/STRONG&gt; in that case both act as &lt;STRONG&gt;Active-Active&lt;/STRONG&gt;. Is there any way to do this automatic.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2021 04:07:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/124733#M75275</guid>
      <dc:creator>surajshinde</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-23T04:07:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: New Check Point Manager implementation.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/124800#M75276</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I think what you talking about is when you get a collision message, in this case you have to do a full sync manually&amp;nbsp; ie. from Secondary to Primary (assuming the secondary was made active, and you have actually made changes).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2021 10:24:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/124800#M75276</guid>
      <dc:creator>genisis__</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-24T10:24:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: New Check Point Manager implementation.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/124911#M75277</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Is there any way to achieve&amp;nbsp; automatic switch the mode Active to standby and Standby to Active between both Manager.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2021 10:50:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/124911#M75277</guid>
      <dc:creator>surajshinde</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-26T10:50:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: New Check Point Manager implementation.</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/124937#M75278</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;By design, failover for Management HA is designed to be a manual process.&lt;BR /&gt;It's not&amp;nbsp;like ClusterXL where failover happens automatically.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2021 17:31:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/New-Check-Point-Manager-implementation/m-p/124937#M75278</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-26T17:31:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

