<?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: PIX redundancy in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-redundancy/m-p/67673#M678412</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;If I understand correct, and assuming that interface 1+2 will be used for the outside and 3+4 for the outside. Also assuming 1+2 will be in the same subnet (e.g. 213.1.1.0) and 3+4 would be in the same subnet (e.g. 172.16.0.0), I believe that this will be impossible as the PIX IOS most likely will not allow you to assign the same subnet to two interfaces. Also because each interface has to have a security-level (e.g. outside =0 / inside=100), the PIX would become confused.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But if go ahead a setup a test-lab and make it work I would be much obliged if you could drop me a line or two...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Goran&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2002 19:20:13 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>gradosavljevic</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2002-05-09T19:20:13Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>PIX redundancy</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-redundancy/m-p/67672#M678379</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If I have 4 interfaces on my PIX535 is it possible to use two interfaces as inside and two as outside, ex. "inside", "inside2", "outside", "outside2" and then let the inside interfaces use nat for the same address space and let the the outside interfaces share the same global address pool?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I want to connect the PIX to two switches on both the internal and the external network for redundancy.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is that kind of configuration possible?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 06:03:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-redundancy/m-p/67672#M678379</guid>
      <dc:creator>dasplund</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-21T06:03:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PIX redundancy</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-redundancy/m-p/67673#M678412</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;If I understand correct, and assuming that interface 1+2 will be used for the outside and 3+4 for the outside. Also assuming 1+2 will be in the same subnet (e.g. 213.1.1.0) and 3+4 would be in the same subnet (e.g. 172.16.0.0), I believe that this will be impossible as the PIX IOS most likely will not allow you to assign the same subnet to two interfaces. Also because each interface has to have a security-level (e.g. outside =0 / inside=100), the PIX would become confused.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But if go ahead a setup a test-lab and make it work I would be much obliged if you could drop me a line or two...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Goran&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2002 19:20:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/pix-redundancy/m-p/67673#M678412</guid>
      <dc:creator>gradosavljevic</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2002-05-09T19:20:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

