<?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 What you read is correct, the in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083351#M136144</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;What you read is correct, the platforms must match.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2017 14:45:25 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Collin Clark</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2017-04-26T14:45:25Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ASA Failover support</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083350#M136143</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello, Can an ASA 5515-x and 5525-x firewall be configured as failover pairs? I read they must be identical platforms? Anyone have an explanation?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thank you!&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Brett&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 09:16:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083350#M136143</guid>
      <dc:creator>Brett Martin</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-12T09:16:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>What you read is correct, the</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083351#M136144</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;What you read is correct, the platforms must match.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2017 14:45:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083351#M136144</guid>
      <dc:creator>Collin Clark</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-04-26T14:45:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thanks Collin!</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083352#M136145</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks Collin!&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I have another question, is it possible to set these firewalls up in pairs using HSRP and OSPF to create a redundant inter-site link? There will be a pair of 5515-x/5525-x at location A linking to an additional set of&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN&gt;5515-x/5525-x at Location B. I would like all traffic to be traversing between locations using the 5525-x pairs over a VPN, however, if one of the primary firewalls fail or the link between them is down, I would like the set of 5515-x firewalls to carry traffic and revert back once the original failure is corrected.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2017 15:28:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083352#M136145</guid>
      <dc:creator>Brett Martin</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-04-26T15:28:04Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>HSRP is not supported on the</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083353#M136147</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;HSRP is not supported on the ASA. You could do some IPSLA/tracking to achieve the failover. Could you do a 5515 pair at one site and 5525 at another or are you concerned about the throughput in the 5515?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2017 15:45:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083353#M136147</guid>
      <dc:creator>Collin Clark</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-04-26T15:45:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Is IPSLA best to be</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083354#M136149</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Is IPSLA best to be configured to point to the remote firewall&amp;nbsp;for tracking state?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Is OSPF a better option for the fact that this would provide firewall and link redundancy--i.e. primary can route through secondary if primary link fails? If so, I am using VPN's to connect the 2 sets of firewalls. Would OSPF need to be setup to directed unicats vs multicast for neighbor communications over VPN?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks Collin!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2017 16:04:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083354#M136149</guid>
      <dc:creator>Brett Martin</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-04-26T16:04:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>There is the rub. The ASA's</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083355#M136150</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;There is the rub. The ASA's will not establish a (routing) peering relationship across the VPN tunnel. You'll have to create a GRE tunnel between a router at each site and then peer across that. The VPN tunnel is just a transport. Routing across VPN tunnels with redundancy can be a PIA. IGP really doesn't matter.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Apr 2017 16:53:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-failover-support/m-p/3083355#M136150</guid>
      <dc:creator>Collin Clark</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-04-27T16:53:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

