<?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: ClusterXL HA - Adding interface on only 1 unit in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36704#M91678</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is what I'm looking for&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm unfamiliar with this view though. Topology settings menu in r80.10 is different for me, unless this is in the global properties advanced configuration?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In 80.10 I see private, but no mention of monitored on non monitored.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2018 18:31:12 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>NorthernNetGuy</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2018-10-19T18:31:12Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ClusterXL HA - Adding interface on only 1 unit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36697#M91671</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have&amp;nbsp;a CusterXL HA setup (2 units), And a 2nd small external IP range that I'll be migrating over to our checkpoint firewall.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I only have 1 IP address available to define an interface with on our cluster in that IP range (With future plans to put everything behind a reverse proxy, to free up addresses so I can do a proper HA setup).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is it okay to add an additional interface on only one of the units (active), and reference that IP in the Proxy ARP ? I'm not sure if this will have any bad interactions with ClusterXL, as all my other interfaces in the cluster are setup properly with VIPs. I don't expect any bad behavior, but I'd like to see if anyone else has done this, and their experiences.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I know this will make the services unavailable if there is a failover, but that has been deemed acceptable for us in the short term.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;*edited for spelling&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2018 12:40:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36697#M91671</guid>
      <dc:creator>NorthernNetGuy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-19T12:40:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ClusterXL HA - Adding interface on only 1 unit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36698#M91672</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;One IP is all you need to setup vIP on the cluster. You can use IPs from different subnet for the physical interfaces and assign your single remaining IP from working range to be the vIP on the cluster.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;H3 class="" style="color: #7192e5; background-color: #ffffff; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; font-size: 20px; margin: 0.5em 0px 0em; padding: 0pt 0pt 1px;"&gt;Configuring Cluster Addresses on Different Subnets&lt;/H3&gt;&lt;P class="" style="color: #000000; background-color: #ffffff; text-decoration: none; font-size: 12px; margin: 6pt 0pt; padding: 0pt;"&gt;Only one routable IP address is required in a ClusterXL cluster, for the virtual cluster interface that faces the Internet. All cluster member physical IP addresses can be non-routable.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="" style="color: #000000; background-color: #ffffff; text-decoration: none; font-size: 12px; margin: 6pt 0pt; padding: 0pt;"&gt;Configuring different subnets for the cluster IP addresses and the member addresses is useful in order to:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL class="" style="color: #000000; background-color: #ffffff; margin-top: 3pt; margin-bottom: 0pt;"&gt;&lt;LI class="" style="color: #000000; background-color: inherit; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0cm; font-size: 12px; margin: 3pt 0pt 0pt; padding: 0pt;"&gt;Enable a multi-machine cluster to replace a single-machine gateway in a pre-configured network, without the need to allocate new addresses to the cluster members.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI class="" style="color: #000000; background-color: inherit; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0cm; font-size: 12px; margin: 3pt 0pt 0pt; padding: 0pt;"&gt;Allow organizations to use only one routable address for the ClusterXL Gateway Cluster. This saves routable addresses.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2018 12:47:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36698#M91672</guid>
      <dc:creator>Vladimir</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-19T12:47:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ClusterXL HA - Adding interface on only 1 unit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36699#M91673</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;You may want to look here:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A class="link-titled" href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk32073" title="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk32073"&gt;Configuring Cluster Addresses on Different Subnets&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2018 12:47:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36699#M91673</guid>
      <dc:creator>_Val_</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-19T12:47:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ClusterXL HA - Adding interface on only 1 unit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36700#M91674</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I remember seeing this SK before. I'm reading over the article and it's a bit confusing.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Here's my interpretation of it, simplified into a couple lines:&lt;BR /&gt;The switch port that the physical interfaces connect to will still be our external VLAN, but the physical interfaces on the gateway will be defined as an IP in a different subnet, and that subnet is defined within the gateway. I would then use a static route within the gateway to route between the two subnets within the gateway?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Then because, of proxy ARP and VIP, the physical interface on the gateway will still be able to receive and transceiver as the VIP is what is used as the primary address?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is that kind of the gist of it?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2018 13:36:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36700#M91674</guid>
      <dc:creator>NorthernNetGuy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-19T13:36:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ClusterXL HA - Adding interface on only 1 unit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36701#M91675</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;It is pretty much how I read it too.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2018 14:17:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36701#M91675</guid>
      <dc:creator>Vladimir</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-19T14:17:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ClusterXL HA - Adding interface on only 1 unit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36702#M91676</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;This seems like a good option that I'd like to implement, however I'd still like to know if my original example would work.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can I make a non-cluster interface in a clusterXL setup? To have just one of my gateways in the cluster have a unique interface would be nice.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2018 18:11:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36702#M91676</guid>
      <dc:creator>NorthernNetGuy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-19T18:11:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ClusterXL HA - Adding interface on only 1 unit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36703#M91677</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;You can. See screenshot below:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;IMG class="image-1 jive-image" src="https://community.checkpoint.com/legacyfs/online/checkpoint/71696_pastedImage_1.png" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Use "Monitored Private" if you want the cluster to failover, should the interface go down, or "Non-monitored Private" if you rather remain on the active member this interface belongs to.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2018 18:18:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36703#M91677</guid>
      <dc:creator>Vladimir</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-19T18:18:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ClusterXL HA - Adding interface on only 1 unit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36704#M91678</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is what I'm looking for&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm unfamiliar with this view though. Topology settings menu in r80.10 is different for me, unless this is in the global properties advanced configuration?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In 80.10 I see private, but no mention of monitored on non monitored.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2018 18:31:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36704#M91678</guid>
      <dc:creator>NorthernNetGuy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-19T18:31:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ClusterXL HA - Adding interface on only 1 unit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36705#M91679</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I had to use the R77.30 demo to pull this up for you, as R80.++ does not include clusters or VSXs.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;According to documentation:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="link-titled" href="https://sc1.checkpoint.com/documents/R80.10/WebAdminGuides/EN/CP_R80.10_ClusterXL_AdminGuide/html_frameset.htm?topic=documents/R80.10/WebAdminGuides/EN/CP_R80.10_ClusterXL_AdminGuide/7419" title="https://sc1.checkpoint.com/documents/R80.10/WebAdminGuides/EN/CP_R80.10_ClusterXL_AdminGuide/html_frameset.htm?topic=documents/R80.10/WebAdminGuides/EN/CP_R80.10_ClusterXL_AdminGuide/7419"&gt;ClusterXL R80.10 (Part of Check Point Infinity) Administration Guide&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Both "Private" and "Monitored Private" are still supported.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2018 18:38:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36705#M91679</guid>
      <dc:creator>Vladimir</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-19T18:38:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ClusterXL HA - Adding interface on only 1 unit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36706#M91680</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you very much for your help Vladimir, very detailed responses. I think I got it from here!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2018 18:47:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36706#M91680</guid>
      <dc:creator>NorthernNetGuy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-19T18:47:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ClusterXL HA - Adding interface on only 1 unit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36707#M91681</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;You are quite welcome:)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2018 18:54:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ClusterXL-HA-Adding-interface-on-only-1-unit/m-p/36707#M91681</guid>
      <dc:creator>Vladimir</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-19T18:54:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

