<?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: FTD High Availability Failover using EtherChannel in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-high-availability-failover-using-etherchannel/m-p/4097932#M1070778</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;What is the use case here, putting a single Link to port-channel?&amp;nbsp; that is not going to meet the design goals.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You can not mix 2 devices into one port-channel that is not supported as per I know.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;instead, you can have 2 port-channels(2 Links per device) separately with each device for more throughput and resilience purposes.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2020 22:16:08 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>balaji.bandi</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-06-04T22:16:08Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>FTD High Availability Failover using EtherChannel</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-high-availability-failover-using-etherchannel/m-p/4097887#M1070773</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have two FTD 2120 appliances each with a single interface to the inside and outside. Is it possible when I make them a HA pair to configure each one fo the single interfaces into a port channel?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="design.PNG" style="width: 331px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/76097i154CD0A7502A4488/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="design.PNG" alt="design.PNG" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2020 20:58:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-high-availability-failover-using-etherchannel/m-p/4097887#M1070773</guid>
      <dc:creator>chris.jinks</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-06-04T20:58:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FTD High Availability Failover using EtherChannel</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-high-availability-failover-using-etherchannel/m-p/4097932#M1070778</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;What is the use case here, putting a single Link to port-channel?&amp;nbsp; that is not going to meet the design goals.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You can not mix 2 devices into one port-channel that is not supported as per I know.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;instead, you can have 2 port-channels(2 Links per device) separately with each device for more throughput and resilience purposes.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2020 22:16:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-high-availability-failover-using-etherchannel/m-p/4097932#M1070778</guid>
      <dc:creator>balaji.bandi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-06-04T22:16:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FTD High Availability Failover using EtherChannel</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-high-availability-failover-using-etherchannel/m-p/4098134#M1070789</link>
      <description>Thank you, I assumed the same however after reading some clustering documentation though i would ask the question.</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2020 09:46:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-high-availability-failover-using-etherchannel/m-p/4098134#M1070789</guid>
      <dc:creator>chris.jinks</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-06-05T09:46:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

