<?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: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19247#M3531</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Actually it's easier than that if the only interfaces in use are Mgmt, Sync and bond0 (being the only production interface)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You don't need to rename it as part of upgrade as management server does not care what interface names forms the bond. For example:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;OLDGW: bond0 = eth1+eth2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;NEWGW: bond0 = eth1-01 + eth1-02&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;you don't need need to worry about eth1 &amp;gt; eth1-01 and eth2 &amp;gt; eth1-02 change as that's invisible to VSX object, it only "sees" bond0 &lt;img id="smileyhappy" class="emoticon emoticon-smileyhappy" src="https://community.checkpoint.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.png" alt="Smiley Happy" title="Smiley Happy" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Otherwise it should work! Good luck&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 20:21:07 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Kaspars_Zibarts</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2018-03-14T20:21:07Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19232#M3516</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; overflow-y: auto; max-height: 300px; overflow-x: hidden; width: 455px; word-wrap: break-word;"&gt;I am upgrading the hardware of a cluster made of two open server gateways. The manager has a license of 10 gateways and it manages 10 gateways.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Is it possible to have a cluster made up of two gateways with different hardware?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;So what process would you recommend for the migration?&lt;BR /&gt;I was thinking three options:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; overflow-y: auto; max-height: 300px; overflow-x: hidden; width: 455px; word-wrap: break-word;"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;1) shutdown one of the old gateways and connect one of the new gateways with the configuration of the old gateway, establish SIC, push policies and failover. Finally repeat the process for the second old gateway. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; overflow-y: auto; max-height: 300px; overflow-x: hidden; width: 455px; word-wrap: break-word;"&gt;Is this possible as we will have a cluster made up of gateways with different hardware?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;2) Add the 2 new gateways with new ip address (the cluster will be made up of 4 gateways at this stage) , failover to them and shutdown the old gateways.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; overflow-y: auto; max-height: 300px; overflow-x: hidden; width: 455px; word-wrap: break-word;"&gt; Is it possible, as we will have 12 gateways and we have a license only for 10 gateways.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;3) shutdown the old gateways. Connect the new gateways, establish the SIC, push the policies.&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;This is the less preferred procedure as it will require outage.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2017 14:42:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19232#M3516</guid>
      <dc:creator>Luis_Miguel_Mig</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-15T14:42:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: gateway cluster hardware upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19233#M3517</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;You can ask CP for temporary licenses that will allow you to manage more gateways. I am sure they will accommodate.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2017 15:05:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19233#M3517</guid>
      <dc:creator>Vladimir</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-15T15:05:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: gateway cluster hardware upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19234#M3518</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would go with option 1. Depending on the release you are running you actually can achieve seamless upgrade. Check for "ClusterXL upgrade methods and paths"&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 14px;"&gt;sk107042.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 14px;"&gt;HW wise (assuming you are on fairly recent SW release like R77.30 or R80.10) - it all depends on if you use CoreXL. If you do and are changing number of FWK instances then connection sync is not possible. Also you have to take care of interface naming (if you use open servers, you can keep the same interface names making life easier)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 14px;"&gt;The easiest is to keep the same SW level with new members but it is also possible to upgrade to newer version during the process fairly seamlessly with latest SW releases&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 14px;"&gt;We have gone from appliances to chassis, VSX gateway (downgrading from R77.30 &amp;gt; R76) with a single ping packet loss&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 14px;"&gt;Too many questions to give you exact answer &lt;img id="smileyhappy" class="emoticon emoticon-smileyhappy" src="https://community.checkpoint.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.png" alt="Smiley Happy" title="Smiley Happy" /&gt;&amp;nbsp;but it's not complicated&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 14px;"&gt;Good luck!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2017 15:18:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19234#M3518</guid>
      <dc:creator>Kaspars_Zibarts</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-15T15:18:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: gateway cluster hardware upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19235#M3519</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Clustering is only supported with identical hardware.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You should be able to get a temporary license from either UserCenter or your Check Point SE to support the management of additional gateways.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2017 15:26:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19235#M3519</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-15T15:26:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19236#M3520</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;As I understand, you will migrate to a new open server (not Check Point appliance).&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;In this case you need to make sure that you have the same amount of enabled cores (SND, fw_worker) on both servers, preferably the same software version with the same hotfixes. A cluster like this should work fine, based on my experience.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Personally I would choose the first plan. Install policy, check the cluster status, check sessions, etc. If everything is fine, then failover. If synchronization was not ok and sessions are lost, it still would be faster than plan no 3&amp;nbsp;&lt;img id="smileyhappy" class="emoticon emoticon-smileyhappy" src="https://community.checkpoint.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.png" alt="Smiley Happy" title="Smiley Happy" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But as Vladimir mentioned, evaluation licenses can help for the second plan.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2017 15:29:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19236#M3520</guid>
      <dc:creator>AlekseiShelepov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-15T15:29:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: gateway cluster hardware upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19237#M3521</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;One comment that I forgot - you can allow "out of state" connections for cutover time - this way you can minimise the outage. Once you have built the second member and just before pushing policy set to allow OOS connections. Then the failover to the new member will be less noticeable. Then re-instate it by pushing policy again once running on the new firewall.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2017 15:50:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19237#M3521</guid>
      <dc:creator>Kaspars_Zibarts</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-15T15:50:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: gateway cluster hardware upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19238#M3522</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Here are the steps, not in absolute detail but gives enough to tweak them to your requirements. They have been tested these on four different&amp;nbsp;clusters HW+SW upgrades with one ping loss.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Assumption is that interface names do not change and you use the same physical cables to the switches! You will need to take extra steps to amend those if they do. I have excluded obvious steps like backups&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Preparation:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Pre-build both new firewalls with exact OS configuration as old (routes, interfaces, users, backups, DNS. NTP etc)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Start of the upgrade:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Disable stateful inspection in global properties to allow “out of state” connections during cutover. Connections cannot be synchronized if CoreXL is changing&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Set “maintain current active member” on ClusterXL tab cluster object if set otherwise&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Un-tick the box to push policy to both members (allow only one to succeed) – this is needed when we change SW version on the member&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Push policy to both existing firewalls&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;FW2 upgrade:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;EM&gt;cpstop&lt;/EM&gt; &lt;/STRONG&gt;OLDFW2 (do not shutdown as it's easier to roll back with cpstart)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;connect cables from OLDFW2 to NEWFW2&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;establish SIC to NEWFW2&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Change SW version in the cluster object&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Push policy, it only should succeed to NEWFW2 (old has different SW version)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Do you final checks throughput / connections / ping through FW etc of your choice (we run scripts to collect that)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;cphaprob stat&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/EM&gt; state should be Ready on the NEWFW2&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Failover to the new firewall by &lt;EM&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;cpstop&lt;/STRONG&gt; &lt;/EM&gt;on OLDFW1&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Check that NEWFW2&amp;nbsp;becomes active &lt;EM&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;cphaprob stat&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Do your testing now&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;FW1 upgrade:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Connect all cables from OLDFW1 (that's in cpstop state) firewall to&amp;nbsp;NEWFW1&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Establish SIC to the NEWFW1&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Push policy and make sure it works on both cluster member now&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;cphaprob stat&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/EM&gt; state should become Standby on the new firewall NEWFW1&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Failover to the new firewall by &lt;EM&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;clusterXL_admin down&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/EM&gt; on NEWFW2&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Check that NEWFW1&amp;nbsp;becomes active&lt;EM&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt; cphaprob stat &lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Do your checks again&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Re-enable ClusterXL on NEWFW2&amp;nbsp;by &lt;EM&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;clusterXL_admin up&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Finalise:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Enable stateful inspection again in global properties (turn off allowing out of state)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Reset cluster object ClusterXL active member to the original setting&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Set to push policy to both cluster members&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Push policy&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Check and update licenses in SmartUpdate&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 11.0pt;"&gt;Check sim affinity for SecureXL&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 11.0pt;"&gt;And that's it - go and enjoy your beer! &lt;img id="smileyhappy" class="emoticon emoticon-smileyhappy" src="https://community.checkpoint.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.png" alt="Smiley Happy" title="Smiley Happy" /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 11.0pt;"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;ROLLBACK&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 11.0pt;"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Connect all cables back to old firewalls. &lt;BR /&gt;Connect with SSH and run cpstart on both &lt;BR /&gt;Enable stateful inspection again in global properties. &lt;BR /&gt;Reset cluster object ClusterXL active member to the original setting &lt;BR /&gt;Set to push policy to both cluster members &lt;BR /&gt;Check and update appliance version in GUI &lt;BR /&gt;Push policy &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 16 Dec 2017 19:30:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19238#M3522</guid>
      <dc:creator>Kaspars_Zibarts</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-16T19:30:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19239#M3523</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks Dameon,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;absolutely it makes sense to support clustering only with identical hardware.&amp;nbsp; But what about when the open server require a hardware upgrade? I guess that checkpoint supports or it should support at least one procedure, right? Is there any other procedure that checkpoint would recommend?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1) may not be ideal but I haven't being able to come up with anything better. I think that 1)&amp;nbsp; may be better in terms of minimizing the service outage and also providing a easy/quick rollback if required.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Dec 2017 15:18:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19239#M3523</guid>
      <dc:creator>Luis_Miguel_Mig</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-19T15:18:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19240#M3524</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks Aleksei, good to know that you have tested a similar process/environment succesfully&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Dec 2017 15:36:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19240#M3524</guid>
      <dc:creator>Luis_Miguel_Mig</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-19T15:36:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19241#M3525</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Sync won't work (or could potentially have unexpected behavior) unless the CPUs in the different systems are identical.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Assuming they are different, then the only way to swap things out with minimal disruption is to temporary disable the "Drop Out of State" options before the gateways are physically swapped.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You would disable this before swapping and leave it set for maybe 24 hours afterwords to allow long-standing connections to re-establish.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Similar to the following thread on CPUG:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A class="link-titled" href="https://www.cpug.org/forums/showthread.php/20602-Zero-downtime-upgrade" title="https://www.cpug.org/forums/showthread.php/20602-Zero-downtime-upgrade"&gt;Zero downtime upgrade?&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Note&lt;/STRONG&gt;: This setting is not recommended long-term as this reduces the overall security of your gateways.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For TCP/ICMP, they are set in the Global Properties as shown below.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For UDP, refer to the following SK (note it's an "Expert" level SK, so you may not have access):&amp;nbsp;&lt;A class="link-titled" href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk103084" title="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk103084"&gt;How to configure the Security Gateway to drop Out of State UDP packets&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;IMG class="image-1 jive-image" src="https://community.checkpoint.com/legacyfs/online/checkpoint/61522_pastedImage_1.png" style="width: auto; height: auto;" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Dec 2017 19:33:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19241#M3525</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-19T19:33:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19242#M3526</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks Kaspars, I hadn't thought of the OOS. Good idea.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I was thinking about your vsx implementation. I was how would you design the network interfaces. In a checkpoint cluster you typically&amp;nbsp; have three separate type of interfaces: cluster interfaces, non-monitored private interfaces and sync interfaces.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Did you keep these interfaces separated in a VSX invironment where you have your VSX gateway in two separated physical boxes? I guess that in a VSX environment it is still a good idea to have separated physical interfaces for syn, cluster and non-monitor (mgmt) if it is possible&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2017 10:13:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19242#M3526</guid>
      <dc:creator>Luis_Miguel_Mig</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-21T10:13:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19243#M3527</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hey Luis, I'm not entirely sure if I understood your question about VSX. Typically I have slightly different approach with VSX HW+SW upgrades:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;LAB part&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL style="padding-left: 60px;"&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Change VSLS to run all VS active on one box vsx_util vsls, set VSX2 with higher priority (it's needed later so box does not failover back to VSX1)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;I would have MDS (management) replica in lab environment - do datafreeze in production and restore production MDS data in the lab&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Pre-build new VSX gateways with physical interfaces and other OS settings as required&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Upgrade / change VSX object version using vsx_util&amp;nbsp;upgrade if you are changing gateway SW version&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;/STRONG&gt;Change interface names using vsx_util&amp;nbsp;change_interfaces on MDS if required&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Push out VSX config using vsx_util reconfigure&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Verify licenses&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Change CoreXL if required&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Depending on your VSX environment set to allow OOS in all policies if CoreXL has changed&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Now your two new boxes are fully pre-configured!&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Create MDS backup in the lab&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Rack new VSX gateways in production racks and power on (no cables)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;PROD part&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL&gt;&lt;OL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Restore MDS backup from lab to prod (at this point you will lose control over your VSX cluster)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;cpstop VSX2, and move all cables to NEWVSX2&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Test SIC (should b working) and make sure all VSes are trusted. NEWVSX2 will be in READY state&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Do hard cutover by cpstop VSX1&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Connections should work as you have OOS allowed&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Do your checks on NEWVSX2&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Now move cables to NEWVSX1&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Test SIC (should b working) and make sure all VSes are trusted. NEWVSX1 should be in STANDBY state&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Do hard cutover by cpstop NEWVSX2&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Do your checks on NEWVSX1&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Re-enable NEWVSX2&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Check licenses&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Check logs&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Set VSX1 to have higher priority if needed&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Turn off OSS&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;ROLLBACK&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL style="padding-left: 60px;"&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Cpstart and plug back old firewalls&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;MDS restore prod MDS&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;That's to give you an idea of approach that I have been using for years now. I mean you will need a lot of small tweaks to handle your environment.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Again you can always PM me &lt;img id="smileyhappy" class="emoticon emoticon-smileyhappy" src="https://community.checkpoint.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.png" alt="Smiley Happy" title="Smiley Happy" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Merry Xmas!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2017 10:28:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19243#M3527</guid>
      <dc:creator>Kaspars_Zibarts</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-22T10:28:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19244#M3528</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;It is about the network interfaces. With a physical appliance you would typically have dedicated interfaces for mgmt, for sync and then cluster interfaces with multiple vlans for data. I was wondering if you keep that design&amp;nbsp; with dedicated interfaces or you end up with sync, mgmt and data on the same trunk in a VSX environment.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:54:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19244#M3528</guid>
      <dc:creator>Luis_Miguel_Mig</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-22T15:54:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19245#M3529</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Kaspars, to sens you a PM I need you to follow me. &lt;IMG src="https://community.checkpoint.com/legacyfs/online/checkpoint/emoticons/wink.png" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2017 08:47:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19245#M3529</guid>
      <dc:creator>Luis_Miguel_Mig</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-29T08:47:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19246#M3530</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P style="color: #333333; background-color: #ffffff; border: 0px;"&gt;Hi Kaspars,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="color: #333333; background-color: #ffffff; border: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="color: #333333; background-color: #ffffff; border: 0px;"&gt;We don't have a LAB environment and we are planning on upgrading our VSX cluster from 77.20 to R77.30. However, we also need to replace the CP 4200 GW appliances with 4800's. We have bonding (bond0) configured with interfaces that have different names between 4200 and 4800. We are running MDS R80.10 and I was thinking:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="color: #333333; background-color: #ffffff; border: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL style="color: #333333; background-color: #ffffff; border: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 30px;"&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;In production, move all VS's to&amp;nbsp; OLDGW2 using vsx_util vsls&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;In R80.10 SmartConsole, add a new Bond (bond1)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;From MDS, run&amp;nbsp;vsx_util change_interfaces and select to " 2. Apply changes to the management database only"&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;Select to replace bond0 with bond1&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;setup the new 4800 GW's with R77.30 with bond1 including the new interfaces in the bond.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;Upgrade VSX Cluster via vsx_util upgrade in MDS to R77.30&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;disconnect OLDGW1 and connect NEWGW1 with same Mgmt, sync IP and the new bond1 interfaces&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;Run&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit;"&gt;vsx_util&amp;nbsp;reconfigure and select to reconfigure OLDGW1 (but NEWGW1 is physically connected)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;Disable OOS, push cluster policy to one gateway.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;Perform a hard cutover, check traffic&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;Disconnect OLDGW2 and replace with NEWGW2 with R77.30&amp;nbsp;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;Perform a vsx_util reconfigure on OLDGW2 (but NEWGW2 is physically connected)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI style="border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0.5ex 0px;"&gt;Push policy on both and perform vsls to distribute the VS's to different firewalls.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P style="color: #333333; background-color: #ffffff; border: 0px;"&gt;My main concern is the bond that needs to be replaced with another bond that has different interface names between the two appliances.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="color: #333333; background-color: #ffffff; border: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P style="color: #333333; background-color: #ffffff; border: 0px;"&gt;George&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 19:38:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19246#M3530</guid>
      <dc:creator>GDell_CP</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-03-14T19:38:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19247#M3531</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Actually it's easier than that if the only interfaces in use are Mgmt, Sync and bond0 (being the only production interface)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You don't need to rename it as part of upgrade as management server does not care what interface names forms the bond. For example:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;OLDGW: bond0 = eth1+eth2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;NEWGW: bond0 = eth1-01 + eth1-02&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;you don't need need to worry about eth1 &amp;gt; eth1-01 and eth2 &amp;gt; eth1-02 change as that's invisible to VSX object, it only "sees" bond0 &lt;img id="smileyhappy" class="emoticon emoticon-smileyhappy" src="https://community.checkpoint.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.png" alt="Smiley Happy" title="Smiley Happy" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Otherwise it should work! Good luck&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 20:21:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19247#M3531</guid>
      <dc:creator>Kaspars_Zibarts</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-03-14T20:21:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19248#M3532</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Aaaah,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So just remove the interfaces that do not reflect the new GW and add those that are missing then do a vsx_util reconfigure.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can I do cphacu start to move traffic over or just do a cpstop on the old GW and traffic should failover to the new GW?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;George Dellota&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 21:29:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19248#M3532</guid>
      <dc:creator>GDell_CP</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-03-14T21:29:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19249#M3533</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Not too sure if I understood you correctly so might be easier if you sent a screenshot of your VSX object physical interfaces.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For example here&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;IMG class="image-1 jive-image" src="https://community.checkpoint.com/legacyfs/online/checkpoint/63865_pastedImage_1.png" style="width: auto; height: auto;" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;if interface names inside bond1 and bond2 changed on the new appliance, it would not matter. Don't need any special steps during upgrade (vsx_util change_interfaces)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But it would matter if eth2-0x interface names changed, then you would run vsx_util change_interfaces just as you described.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;BTW, I haven't had time to dig into it, but for us we had to run vsx_util change_interfaces command on the same interface twice, despite the fact it said execution completed successfully first time round. I discovered it accidentally by searching for old interface name after I run command first time and found some references still present in the &amp;nbsp;DB. Running command second time actually "fixes" it. I wish I had an answer for it. It even says the second time that previous run has not fully completed - do you want to complete, answer yes.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Just remember to back up your mgmt before you start for easy rollback! &lt;img id="smileyhappy" class="emoticon emoticon-smileyhappy" src="https://community.checkpoint.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.png" alt="Smiley Happy" title="Smiley Happy" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2018 05:44:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19249#M3533</guid>
      <dc:creator>Kaspars_Zibarts</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-03-15T05:44:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19250#M3534</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Okay, I understand what you mean about the interfaces within bond0. So this is how our current 4200 appliance interfaces looks like:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When I replace the cluster with a 4800, I’ll configure each GW with bond0 and add eth1 and eth2.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would have to do a vsx_util change_interfaces(twice) to delete eth1-02, eth1-03 and eth1-04 and add new interfaces eth4-eth7 and then do a vsx_util reconfigure to “sync” the MDS and GW settings.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I uncheck “Drop out of state TCP packets” in the global properties before the swap of OLDGW2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Do a hard cut on the running OLDGW2 and traffic (hopefully) fails over to NEWGW1 and redo the previous steps on NEWGW2.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Sounds about right?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:40:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19250#M3534</guid>
      <dc:creator>GDell_CP</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-03-15T14:40:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Gateway Cluster Hardware Upgrade</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19251#M3535</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;sounds about right! &lt;img id="smileyhappy" class="emoticon emoticon-smileyhappy" src="https://community.checkpoint.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.png" alt="Smiley Happy" title="Smiley Happy" /&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:01:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/Gateway-Cluster-Hardware-Upgrade/m-p/19251#M3535</guid>
      <dc:creator>Kaspars_Zibarts</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-03-15T15:01:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

