<?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: Quantum Spark IPsec tunnel failover in Spark Firewall (SMB)</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175213#M8512</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;If the encryption domains are the same this will likely be problematic (sk114652).&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Regarding route based, it didn't work in what way we're you using dynamic or static routing?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Else you may need to explore ISP redundancy.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2023 12:13:42 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Chris_Atkinson</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-03-17T12:13:42Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Quantum Spark IPsec tunnel failover</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175186#M8503</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a question regarding quantum spark 1800 (R81.10), i have two ipsec between Check point add peer-firewalls with below scenario&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="QS-Tunnel.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/20133i11699D354FF39667/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="QS-Tunnel.png" alt="QS-Tunnel.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;. But i cannot setup auto failover for both tunnel, swing manual currently. Is there any idea to solve? thanks much, everyone.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;DIV class=""&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2023 06:54:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175186#M8503</guid>
      <dc:creator>CheckCheckM</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-03-17T06:54:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Quantum Spark IPsec tunnel failover</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175192#M8504</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Locally or centrally managed appliance with domain or Route based tunnels?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2023 08:54:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175192#M8504</guid>
      <dc:creator>Chris_Atkinson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-03-17T08:54:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Quantum Spark IPsec tunnel failover</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175196#M8505</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;locally managed. i did using domain coz route base tunnel does not work.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2023 09:30:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175196#M8505</guid>
      <dc:creator>CheckCheckM</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-03-17T09:30:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Quantum Spark IPsec tunnel failover</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175212#M8511</link>
      <description>&lt;H2 class="message-subject"&gt;&lt;SPAN class="lia-message-unread"&gt;&lt;A id="link_18" class="page-link lia-link-navigation lia-custom-event" href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/SMB-Gateways-Spark/Redundant-VPN-Tunnel/m-p/13515?search-action-id=60776118514&amp;amp;search-result-uid=13515" target="_blank"&gt;Redundant &lt;SPAN class="lia-search-match-lithium"&gt;VPN&lt;/SPAN&gt; Tunnel &lt;/A&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/H2&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2023 11:55:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175212#M8511</guid>
      <dc:creator>G_W_Albrecht</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-03-17T11:55:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Quantum Spark IPsec tunnel failover</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175213#M8512</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If the encryption domains are the same this will likely be problematic (sk114652).&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Regarding route based, it didn't work in what way we're you using dynamic or static routing?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Else you may need to explore ISP redundancy.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2023 12:13:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175213#M8512</guid>
      <dc:creator>Chris_Atkinson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-03-17T12:13:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Quantum Spark IPsec tunnel failover</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175239#M8514</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/3630"&gt;@Chris_Atkinson&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;. I'm using static routing but i think, as my scenario, if possible, i prefer to setup route based coz wan link redundancy for both side.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2023 17:39:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175239#M8514</guid>
      <dc:creator>CheckCheckM</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-03-17T17:39:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Quantum Spark IPsec tunnel failover</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175240#M8515</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks much&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/21294"&gt;@G_W_Albrecht&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;. As my scenario,&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN&gt;if possible, i prefer to setup route based coz wan link redundancy for both side. can u pls share route based config guide. Is that need to use VTI in router based?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If i used connection type HA with domain base, peer device (non-checkpoint) need to setup 4 tunnels like mesh. that's why, i prefer router based.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2023 17:42:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175240#M8515</guid>
      <dc:creator>CheckCheckM</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-03-17T17:42:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Quantum Spark IPsec tunnel failover</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175314#M8531</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Failover (metric based) using VTIs over 2 IPSec tunnels is currently a limitation and not supported.&lt;BR /&gt;We will need manual interaction to bring up/down the VTI interface upon tunnel failover.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk105380" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Check Point R77.20.xx for 600 / 700 / 1100 / 1200R / 1400 / 910 Appliance Features and Known Limitations&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;gt;&amp;gt; SMB-2668 -&amp;nbsp;When a VPN tunnel goes down, routes that use the associated VTI as a target (next hop) remain active. Therefore, you cannot use metric-based failover between routes to different VTIs.&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Same goes for 1500/1600/1800 series.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 19 Mar 2023 02:15:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175314#M8531</guid>
      <dc:creator>Tom_Hinoue</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-03-19T02:15:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Quantum Spark IPsec tunnel failover</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175315#M8532</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Unfortunately static routes won't work with route based VPNs for redundancy - known limitation.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If you need this specifically versus dynamic routing please discuss it further with your local SE as an RFE.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 19 Mar 2023 05:13:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175315#M8532</guid>
      <dc:creator>Chris_Atkinson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-03-19T05:13:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Quantum Spark IPsec tunnel failover</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175317#M8533</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the great suggestion!&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/8345"&gt;@Tom_Hinoue&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp; i'm using r81.10.05 but still limitation as known regarding &lt;SPAN&gt;VPN Service based link selection&lt;/SPAN&gt;. Hopefully in next firmware.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 19 Mar 2023 07:58:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Quantum-Spark-IPsec-tunnel-failover/m-p/175317#M8533</guid>
      <dc:creator>CheckCheckM</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-03-19T07:58:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

