<?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: HA Cluster Internet Failover - Starlink in Spark Firewall (SMB)</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/HA-Cluster-Internet-Failover-Starlink/m-p/281244#M14117</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Clustering requires connectivity on all interfaces, including WAN.&lt;BR /&gt;Which means if your Starlink terminal only hands out one IP, you're likely out of luck.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2026 00:05:09 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2026-08-19T00:05:09Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>HA Cluster Internet Failover - Starlink</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/HA-Cluster-Internet-Failover-Starlink/m-p/281172#M14114</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello All&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've got two 1590 appliances running HA through Spark Management at a remote site which has a mix of satellite connections - VSAT, OneWeb, and Starlink. I'm running into a problem with the Starlink.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The Starlink terminal only has a single ethernet, it's connected to a DEMARC switch so both firewalls can access it. Starlink appears to only provide a single CG-NAT IP per terminal and both firewalls seemingly try to lay claim to it - leading to a conflict and traffic loss.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As a stopgap I've disabled the Starlink port for the second firewall, but that defeats the purpose of HA. Is there a way to put the second firewall into a passive mode?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2026 17:58:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/HA-Cluster-Internet-Failover-Starlink/m-p/281172#M14114</guid>
      <dc:creator>SnafuNL</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-08-17T17:58:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: HA Cluster Internet Failover - Starlink</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/HA-Cluster-Internet-Failover-Starlink/m-p/281244#M14117</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Clustering requires connectivity on all interfaces, including WAN.&lt;BR /&gt;Which means if your Starlink terminal only hands out one IP, you're likely out of luck.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2026 00:05:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/HA-Cluster-Internet-Failover-Starlink/m-p/281244#M14117</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-08-19T00:05:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: HA Cluster Internet Failover - Starlink</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/HA-Cluster-Internet-Failover-Starlink/m-p/281247#M14118</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Can the private IP space (before CG-NAT) be assigned statically?&lt;BR /&gt;If so, Scope Local may help if you have only 1 assignable private IP (under the Starlink terminal)&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2026 02:27:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/HA-Cluster-Internet-Failover-Starlink/m-p/281247#M14118</guid>
      <dc:creator>Tom_Hinoue</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-08-19T02:27:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

