<?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 High Availability OPTIONS in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/high-availability-options/m-p/3014648#M146419</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I have two sites 3 miles apart. Both have a 100MB internet pipe and terminates on my Cisco Firewall. I have dmz services running at both sites but my two firewalls are running as stand alone devices. I am just looking for advice on what approach to take (if any) for a High Available solution so i can have the dmz services load balanced across both sites.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I have bought two loadbalancers but don't see how they can handle source based NAT for incoming or outgoing traffic&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Has anyone successfully implemented this project - i am just looking for a nudge in the right direction&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;My&amp;nbsp;cisco's are 5585s with a Cisco Security Mgr pushing the policy to both&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;thanks&lt;BR /&gt;Kevin&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 08:56:54 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>ohareka70</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-12T08:56:54Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>High Availability OPTIONS</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/high-availability-options/m-p/3014648#M146419</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I have two sites 3 miles apart. Both have a 100MB internet pipe and terminates on my Cisco Firewall. I have dmz services running at both sites but my two firewalls are running as stand alone devices. I am just looking for advice on what approach to take (if any) for a High Available solution so i can have the dmz services load balanced across both sites.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I have bought two loadbalancers but don't see how they can handle source based NAT for incoming or outgoing traffic&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Has anyone successfully implemented this project - i am just looking for a nudge in the right direction&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;My&amp;nbsp;cisco's are 5585s with a Cisco Security Mgr pushing the policy to both&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;thanks&lt;BR /&gt;Kevin&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 08:56:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/high-availability-options/m-p/3014648#M146419</guid>
      <dc:creator>ohareka70</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-12T08:56:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>It sounds as though the</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/high-availability-options/m-p/3014649#M146427</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;It sounds as though the loadbalancers are to be placed infront of the ASAs?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Though I haven't setup the loadbalance side of the solution, I do have a customer that uses Citrix Netscaler for exactly this.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The setup is ASA ---- Netscaler ---- DC1/DC2&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;services are NATed from the internet to the Netscaler DMZ and then the Netscaler takes care of the rest.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;But as you mention that you have CSM pushing the policies to the ASA then I am assuming they are not setup in Active / Standby HA. &amp;nbsp;This is where my solution differes in that the ASAs are in Active / Standby (we have a dark fiber running between the datacenters).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;--&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Please remember to select a correct answer and rate helpful posts&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2017 21:20:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/high-availability-options/m-p/3014649#M146427</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marius Gunnerud</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-02-16T21:20:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

