<?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 Pix active/active failover in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-active-active-failover/m-p/461346#M528409</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;First of all, thanks for your time. I have a question implementing active/active failover on a pix with 7.0. I have two pix 535 with 3 ethernets (inside, outside and failover). Until now they were in active/pasive but I would like to put them in active/active. Is there a way of doing this WITHOUT installing any more ethernet cards? Further more, can this be done using just one context? I found this info:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6120/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a008045247e.html#wp1096075" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6120/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a008045247e.html#wp1096075&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can I implement it some other way?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Kindest regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Fernando&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;CCIE#144XX CCNP CCDP&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 08:39:24 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>fernanrl</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-02-21T08:39:24Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Pix active/active failover</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-active-active-failover/m-p/461346#M528409</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;First of all, thanks for your time. I have a question implementing active/active failover on a pix with 7.0. I have two pix 535 with 3 ethernets (inside, outside and failover). Until now they were in active/pasive but I would like to put them in active/active. Is there a way of doing this WITHOUT installing any more ethernet cards? Further more, can this be done using just one context? I found this info:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6120/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a008045247e.html#wp1096075" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6120/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a008045247e.html#wp1096075&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can I implement it some other way?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Kindest regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Fernando&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;CCIE#144XX CCNP CCDP&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 08:39:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-active-active-failover/m-p/461346#M528409</guid>
      <dc:creator>fernanrl</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-21T08:39:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Pix active/active failover</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-active-active-failover/m-p/461347#M528410</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hello&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;IMHO the "active/active" is just sales talk. What Cisco means when they saids active/active in pix7/ASA is just load balancing if You are running multiple fw contexts.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For each virtual firewall you setup one physical fw as active, and the other as passive. If you have 4 virutal fw:s (contexts), you set Fw A as active for context 1 and 2, and Fw B as active for context 3 and 4. In that way, when a unit fails, the two contexts that are active on that unit will fail over to the other unit.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If You are not running multiple contexts in your firewalls you cannot use active/active failover.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Sorry, it disappointed me too when I realized...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards Jimmy&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2006 12:31:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-active-active-failover/m-p/461347#M528410</guid>
      <dc:creator>jilahbg</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-01-19T12:31:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Pix active/active failover</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-active-active-failover/m-p/461348#M528411</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can we do Active/Active with FWSM blade as well? Of course, assuming i run multi-context...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 07:55:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-active-active-failover/m-p/461348#M528411</guid>
      <dc:creator>vramanaiah</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-02-16T07:55:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

