<?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: Possible DHCP relay limit in Spark Firewall (SMB)</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/199575#M9901</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I would open an official TAC case to get an answer to it. Its possible there might be a limitation.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Andy&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 2023 00:32:15 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-12-04T00:32:15Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Possible DHCP relay limit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/154779#M7211</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Does anyone know if there is an upper limit to the number of interfaces you can enable DHCP relay for on the Spark 1600 appliances (&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;&lt;SPAN class=""&gt;R80.20.40&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;)? We have a situation where we can add DHCP relay config for up to 22 VLAN interfaces, but as soon as you add the 23rd one, the dhcrelay process either dies or just won't start. We do currently have a TAC case open but I thought I'd check if anyone else has run into this issue before.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2022 13:04:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/154779#M7211</guid>
      <dc:creator>Kevin_Hodgson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-08-09T13:04:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Possible DHCP relay limit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/154781#M7212</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Sounds like you may have hit an upper limit of some sort or a bug.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2022 14:20:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/154781#M7212</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-08-09T14:20:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Possible DHCP relay limit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/154782#M7213</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes, that's the assumption we're working with.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2022 14:21:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/154782#M7213</guid>
      <dc:creator>Kevin_Hodgson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-08-09T14:21:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Possible DHCP relay limit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/198266#M9815</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Did you ever get any solution for this?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a customer that has over 50 segments that they wish to use with a 1600 device.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Would appreciate any feedback available or sk that you have been pointed towards.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Andrew&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Nov 2023 12:42:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/198266#M9815</guid>
      <dc:creator>Andrew-OCD</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-11-17T12:42:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Possible DHCP relay limit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/199572#M9900</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Does anybody have any more upto date information on this topic?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I heard somewhere that the buffer was being resized and so this would make a difference but I am trying to find something official on this topic.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Andrew&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 03 Dec 2023 19:52:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/199572#M9900</guid>
      <dc:creator>Andrew-OCD</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-12-03T19:52:04Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Possible DHCP relay limit</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/199575#M9901</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I would open an official TAC case to get an answer to it. Its possible there might be a limitation.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Andy&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 2023 00:32:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Possible-DHCP-relay-limit/m-p/199575#M9901</guid>
      <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-12-04T00:32:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

