<?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: Maestro Sync Question in Hyperscale Firewall (Maestro)</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/234783#M3059</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Because we would like to use this at one installation, I would like to ask if this solution is approved by Check Point? I was not able to verify that by any Check Point official documentation and don't want to end with unsupported configuration.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Dec 2024 15:15:28 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Michal_Gans</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-12-05T15:15:28Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Maestro Sync Question</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/171676#M1428</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Mates,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;received two Maestro Sync questions I'm unsure with (maybe silly questions):&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;In Dual room setup, if Sync goes down, only first MHO is processing traffic right?&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Is it possible to configure Sync redundancy (second link or bonding) in Dual Room single site with two MHO-175 (R81.10)?&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you very much!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bye&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Michael&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2023 13:36:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/171676#M1428</guid>
      <dc:creator>dj0Nz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-02-16T13:36:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Maestro Sync Question</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/171747#M1429</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The Sync interface between Dual MHO's is used for configuration sync operations only, so that if a configuration change is made on one of them it will also be made on the other.&amp;nbsp; That is it, there is no state table sync or anything else going on that will immediately impact the operation of the MHOs if the Sync interface goes down.&amp;nbsp; So if the Sync interface goes down both MHO's will continue to pass traffic normally, although if a config change is made on one MHO and not propagated to the other in this state it could definitely cause traffic handling issues.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Yes you can have redundant Sync interfaces, you'd just need to change the type of the second port from whatever it is to type "Sync".&amp;nbsp; Depending on the Orchestrator model there may be restrictions about what physical ports can be reassigned to be for Sync.&amp;nbsp; There’s no need to manually create a Bond interface as it will be created automatically by the Orchestrator when the second Sync interface is defined. The bond link aggregation will operate in XOR mode.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2023 16:24:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/171747#M1429</guid>
      <dc:creator>Timothy_Hall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-02-16T16:24:04Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Maestro Sync Question</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/171762#M1430</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Ah yes, now that you mention it, indeed that was a topic in one of the workshops but I wasn't sure any more. Thank your very much for explaining!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bye&lt;BR /&gt;Michael&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2023 16:56:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/171762#M1430</guid>
      <dc:creator>dj0Nz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-02-16T16:56:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Maestro Sync Question</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/234783#M3059</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Because we would like to use this at one installation, I would like to ask if this solution is approved by Check Point? I was not able to verify that by any Check Point official documentation and don't want to end with unsupported configuration.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Dec 2024 15:15:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/234783#M3059</guid>
      <dc:creator>Michal_Gans</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-05T15:15:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Maestro Sync Question</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/234850#M3060</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Dual 'ssm_sync' interfaces are 100% supported.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 2024 06:21:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/234850#M3060</guid>
      <dc:creator>emmap</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-06T06:21:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Maestro Sync Question</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/234851#M3061</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi, does that mean that dual sync interfaces are supported even for external sync in dual site deployment?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 2024 06:42:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/234851#M3061</guid>
      <dc:creator>Arnost_Odvalil</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-06T06:42:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Maestro Sync Question</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/234861#M3062</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes you can also have two site_sync interfaces per MHO.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 2024 09:27:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Hyperscale-Firewall-Maestro/Maestro-Sync-Question/m-p/234861#M3062</guid>
      <dc:creator>emmap</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-06T09:27:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

