<?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: Best Firewalling Option For Server Farms in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/best-firewalling-option-for-server-farms/m-p/3228531#M1012406</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I can't really give you a straight answer. Option 1 is more secure and option 2 is more flexible, but with correct switch config option 2 can be as secure.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If you have a budget for&amp;nbsp;just 2 ASAs, option 1 means no redundancy possibility and option 2 means redundancy is possible. (check license requirements for specific models to make sure)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I would lean towards option 2, but if security between the 2 departments has the highest priority than option 1 could be a better fit.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Dec 2017 11:47:58 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Bogdan Nita</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2017-12-07T11:47:58Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Best Firewalling Option For Server Farms</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/best-firewalling-option-for-server-farms/m-p/3227948#M1012403</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Gents,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I'm working on a design scenario of a network &lt;STRONG&gt;Divestiture&lt;/STRONG&gt; where company (A) needs it's data center resources to be completely protected from Company (B) and company (B) also wants protection from company (A).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;As you can see below topology both the companies are already accessing Internet via different ISP lines using their own external firewalls.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Topology.JPG" style="width: 896px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/4380i6B9917F136324835/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="Topology.JPG" alt="Topology.JPG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Now&lt;/STRONG&gt; their Server Farms are planned to be protected using the internal firewalls (Cisco ASAs).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I've two options to deploy these ASAs to protect both the companies server farms but need your opinion which option is better.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT face="arial black,avant garde" size="5"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;OPTION # 1&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Placing the Firewalls between Core and Top of the Rack server nodes. Static routing between Core and FWs.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Option1.JPG" style="width: 857px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/4381iB7C723ED0AE9376A/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="Option1.JPG" alt="Option1.JPG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="5"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;OPTION # 2&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Connecting the Firewalls directly to the Core and keeping the SVIs of servers' vlans on them I mean on the FWs. In this case anyone who has to access the servers needs to hit the Firewall and &lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;traffic to be inspected by the firewall rules.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Option2.JPG" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/4382i57E2F085853B41A8/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="Option2.JPG" alt="Option2.JPG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Kindly, let me know your opinion which option&amp;nbsp;is better to go with.&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Thanks in advance!!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Kind Regards,&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT size="3"&gt;Umer&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 14:54:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/best-firewalling-option-for-server-farms/m-p/3227948#M1012403</guid>
      <dc:creator>umer zubairi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-21T14:54:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Best Firewalling Option For Server Farms</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/best-firewalling-option-for-server-farms/m-p/3227983#M1012404</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Here are my thoughts on the 2 designs:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Security:&lt;BR /&gt;- in option 2 vlan hopping could be posible, but this can be avoided by using a unique native vlan&lt;BR /&gt;- also if switch interfaces are missconfigured, servers from company A could access vlans from B&lt;BR /&gt;Performance:&lt;BR /&gt;- probably similar performance in booth cases, but packets in Option 2 will traverse the core switch 2 times&lt;BR /&gt;Reundancy:&lt;BR /&gt;- In option 1 you would need 4 ASAs for redundancy&lt;BR /&gt;- In option 2 you can have 2 ASAs in failover with 2 contexts&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2017 15:13:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/best-firewalling-option-for-server-farms/m-p/3227983#M1012404</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bogdan Nita</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-06T15:13:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Best Firewalling Option For Server Farms</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/best-firewalling-option-for-server-farms/m-p/3228048#M1012405</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks Bro for sharing your thoughts!&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Both the clients aren't willing to invenst more in buying redundant hardware as they've future plans to dissolve the business till their transnational settlement.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Therefore, I've only two ASAs to protect their server farms.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;So what do you think that in a non-redundant firewalling which option will be better to go with.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2017 16:35:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/best-firewalling-option-for-server-farms/m-p/3228048#M1012405</guid>
      <dc:creator>umer zubairi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-06T16:35:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Best Firewalling Option For Server Farms</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/best-firewalling-option-for-server-farms/m-p/3228531#M1012406</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I can't really give you a straight answer. Option 1 is more secure and option 2 is more flexible, but with correct switch config option 2 can be as secure.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If you have a budget for&amp;nbsp;just 2 ASAs, option 1 means no redundancy possibility and option 2 means redundancy is possible. (check license requirements for specific models to make sure)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I would lean towards option 2, but if security between the 2 departments has the highest priority than option 1 could be a better fit.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Dec 2017 11:47:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/best-firewalling-option-for-server-farms/m-p/3228531#M1012406</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bogdan Nita</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-12-07T11:47:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

