<?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: LAN failover using a redundant interface in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663827#M579938</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Andrew,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Just to clarify. Are you saying that LAN failover using a redundant interface without a switch or hub is supported in 8.0(4) or later software? I have tested both scenarios shown above in my lab using a pair of 5550's with software version 8.4 and have not seen any issues when directly connected or when connecting through a switch.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Charles&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 21:50:47 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>cclem</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2011-04-05T21:50:47Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>LAN failover using a redundant interface</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663823#M579934</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If I want to use a redundant interface for the LAN based failover it is a requirement that I must put a hub or switch between the two ASA devices? I am attaching a couple of recommened scenarios from Cisco -- one without a switch and one with a couple of switches.&amp;nbsp; If I don't use a switch or hub, I am thinking that I could have the active port on the primary unit connected directly to the standby port on the secondary unit thus causing a failure.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 20:17:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663823#M579934</guid>
      <dc:creator>cclem</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T20:17:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: LAN failover using a redundant interface</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663824#M579935</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes, it is a requirement to have &lt;SPAN class="content"&gt;a switch or hub between the two units in case &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="content"&gt;redundant interface is used as failover link.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is explained here: (check under '&lt;SPAN class="content"&gt;For failover, follow these guidelines when adding member interface') &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-external-small" href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/docs/security/asa/asa82/configuration/guide/intrface.html#wp1062371"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/docs/security/asa/asa82/configuration/guide/intrface.html#wp1062371&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Paps&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:45:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663824#M579935</guid>
      <dc:creator>padatta</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-05T14:45:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: LAN failover using a redundant interface</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663825#M579936</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the quick reply Padatta.&amp;nbsp; I was somewhat surprised to see the Cisco diagram showing the two failover links directly connected.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 16:11:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663825#M579936</guid>
      <dc:creator>cclem</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-05T16:11:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: LAN failover using a redundant interface</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663826#M579937</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;This scenario is supported with Redunant interfaces in 8.0(4) and later software. I will get the documentation corrected.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Andrew&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 20:34:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663826#M579937</guid>
      <dc:creator>Andrew Ossipov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-05T20:34:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: LAN failover using a redundant interface</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663827#M579938</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Andrew,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Just to clarify. Are you saying that LAN failover using a redundant interface without a switch or hub is supported in 8.0(4) or later software? I have tested both scenarios shown above in my lab using a pair of 5550's with software version 8.4 and have not seen any issues when directly connected or when connecting through a switch.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Charles&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 21:50:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663827#M579938</guid>
      <dc:creator>cclem</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-05T21:50:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: LAN failover using a redundant interface</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663828#M579939</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hello Charles,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;That is correct. You can use a pair of directly connected redundant intefaces as a failover or state link in 8.0(4), 8.1(2), and all of the later branches. The change to the configuration guides will be pushed out shortly.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Andrew&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 22:26:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/lan-failover-using-a-redundant-interface/m-p/1663828#M579939</guid>
      <dc:creator>Andrew Ossipov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-04-05T22:26:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

