comparision of ISP Redundancy features for R81 and R80.40.

[Garrett_DirSec]

Hello --  my apologies for ignorance.

Are there differences between ClusterXL ISP Redundancy between R81 and R80.40  in terms of architecture options and/or features supported?  

Do they both provide same connectivity options for site-to-site connectivity -- and associated limitations -- with (a) another checkpoint gateway, and (b) 3rd party peer?

I've review the  ClusterXL documentation for R81 ISP Redundancy HERE

and R80.40 ISP Redundancy HERE

[PhoneBoy · Accepted solution]

ISP Redundancy has been around for quite some time and hasn’t received any major functionality updates in a while.
I would expect both versions would be the same.
Most of the functionality we’re adding along these lines is being addressed through Policy-Based Routing, Dynamic Routing, and other similar features.
I believe those enhancements are planned for upcoming versions.

[Timothy_Hall]

Looks exactly the same in the SmartConsole GUI, and I'm not seeing any mention of ISP Redundancy in any of the R81 Known Issues/Resolved Issues/Release Notes/Jumbo HFAs other than a limitation involving CGNAT.  ISP Redundancy doesn't appear to have changed at all from version R80.40 to R81 that I can see.

[Garrett_DirSec]

thanks @Timothy_Hall and @PhoneBoy for your insight.  much appreciated!