<?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: High Availability (HA) on Checkpoint 1590 Quantum Spark in Spark Firewall (SMB)</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211344#M10498</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Is this locally or centrally managed, running R81.10.10 firmware?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2024 06:36:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Chris_Atkinson</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-04-16T06:36:10Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>High Availability (HA) on Checkpoint 1590 Quantum Spark</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211332#M10496</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi everyone,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I'm new to Checkpoint and I've been trying to learn how to set up for my customer.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Currently, I'm stuck in this place (Connection diagram as shown in the attached picture). I have configured HA for LAN on Lan3, synchronizing the firewall via Lan2. I don't HA the 2 WAN inputs of the 2 Checkpoints, but let them connect directly to the IPS via Metro (my customer using Metro Wan-MPLS Layer 2). &lt;SPAN&gt;Now if I drop the channel on FW1's WAN, will FW2 automatically switch from Standby to Active?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Can someone help me with the answer to this, please.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:27:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211332#M10496</guid>
      <dc:creator>Phillip-83</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-04-15T20:27:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High Availability (HA) on Checkpoint 1590 Quantum Spark</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211342#M10497</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;To the best of my knowledge, only interfaces that are involved in clustering can cause a failover.&lt;BR /&gt;Doesn't sound like the WAN is involved in clustering, which means I would expect this to not work.&lt;BR /&gt;However, you might want to open a TAC case and confirm: &lt;A href="https://help.checkpoint.com" target="_blank"&gt;https://help.checkpoint.com&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:00:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211342#M10497</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-04-16T00:00:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High Availability (HA) on Checkpoint 1590 Quantum Spark</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211344#M10498</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Is this locally or centrally managed, running R81.10.10 firmware?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2024 06:36:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211344#M10498</guid>
      <dc:creator>Chris_Atkinson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-04-16T06:36:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High Availability (HA) on Checkpoint 1590 Quantum Spark</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211359#M10499</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;So if I have 2 transmission channels, with this checkpoint 1590 (There is no Router and SW WAN above the FW), is there any plan to HA those 2 transmission channels? These two transmission channels use 2 different IP layers from 2 different network providers.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2024 05:11:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211359#M10499</guid>
      <dc:creator>Phillip-83</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-04-16T05:11:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High Availability (HA) on Checkpoint 1590 Quantum Spark</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211370#M10502</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Find all details for how to configure a SMB HA Cluster here:&lt;A href="https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk121096" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;sk121096: How to configure a &lt;STRONG&gt;cluster&lt;/STRONG&gt; between locally managed &lt;STRONG&gt;SMB&lt;/STRONG&gt; appliances&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2024 09:16:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211370#M10502</guid>
      <dc:creator>G_W_Albrecht</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-04-16T09:16:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High Availability (HA) on Checkpoint 1590 Quantum Spark</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211422#M10515</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;ClusterXL (on non-SMB appliances) definitely has a requirement for the WAN interfaces being on a "shared" network.&lt;BR /&gt;That said, clustering is a little different on the SMB appliances,&amp;nbsp;which is one of the reasons I suggested checking with TAC.&lt;BR /&gt;I will also check internally as well.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:28:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211422#M10515</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-04-16T14:28:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: High Availability (HA) on Checkpoint 1590 Quantum Spark</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211428#M10516</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Actually, there's an SK that covers this exact scenario and the steps needed to achieve it:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk181841" target="_blank"&gt;https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk181841&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:34:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/High-Availability-HA-on-Checkpoint-1590-Quantum-Spark/m-p/211428#M10516</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-04-16T14:34:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

