<?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: Cable-Based Active/Active Failover or LAN-Based Active/Activ in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/cable-based-active-active-failover-or-lan-based-active-active/m-p/638565#M1031732</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Try these links for more info:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_tech_note09186a0080094ea7.shtml#statefulfailover" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_tech_note09186a0080094ea7.shtml#statefulfailover&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/secursw/ps2120/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a008017278a.html" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/secursw/ps2120/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a008017278a.html&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:04:14 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>fmeetz</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2007-01-22T15:04:14Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Cable-Based Active/Active Failover or LAN-Based Active/Active Failover</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/cable-based-active-active-failover-or-lan-based-active-active/m-p/638564#M1031730</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Anyone can help what are the Pros and Cons of Cable Based Active/Active Failover over LAN-Based?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also, why there is a need for switch in the LAN Based Failover? Isnt it a point of failure as well? Why can't a cross cable be used?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Lastly, How fast is the TCP-session handover to the other Active Pair when the other box fails, something like a Cisco Load Balancer kind of mechanism? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Or if fast stateful failover is needed, does the Cisco Load Balancer CSS11501 for PIX7.2(Active Active) come into play?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 09:20:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/cable-based-active-active-failover-or-lan-based-active-active/m-p/638564#M1031730</guid>
      <dc:creator>r.docuyanan</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T09:20:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Cable-Based Active/Active Failover or LAN-Based Active/Activ</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/cable-based-active-active-failover-or-lan-based-active-active/m-p/638565#M1031732</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Try these links for more info:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_tech_note09186a0080094ea7.shtml#statefulfailover" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_tech_note09186a0080094ea7.shtml#statefulfailover&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/secursw/ps2120/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a008017278a.html" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/secursw/ps2120/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a008017278a.html&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2007 15:04:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/cable-based-active-active-failover-or-lan-based-active-active/m-p/638565#M1031732</guid>
      <dc:creator>fmeetz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-01-22T15:04:14Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

