<?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: FTD inter-chassis cluster in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-inter-chassis-cluster/m-p/3838340#M921777</link>
    <description>Management interface is shared among the modules in a chassis, which means you only 1 management interface is required.&lt;BR /&gt;Same with data port-channel interface.</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 14 Apr 2019 21:00:55 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Ilkin</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-04-14T21:00:55Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>FTD inter-chassis cluster</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-inter-chassis-cluster/m-p/3838205#M921776</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&lt;BR /&gt;Good day to you I need your advice regarding FTD clustering in firepower 9300 let me explain what the customer is asking for&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;• We have two FP9300 chassis and every chassis has two FTD security module SM-44&lt;BR /&gt;• The customer want to deploy it as a cluster between the two chassis ( inter chassis clustering)&lt;BR /&gt;• I was looking for a document explains how the cluster will be implemented but I couldn’t find a one &lt;BR /&gt;• The FTD version will be 6.2.3 &lt;BR /&gt;• The plan is to have one arm firewall includes inside and outside zone&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The question is &lt;BR /&gt;• Regarding the FTD management should we have a dedicated physical interface for each security module ?&lt;BR /&gt;For example Eth1/8 for SM 1 and Eth1/7 for SM 2 ? &lt;BR /&gt;as I know the cluster takes one management interface for all security modules . and in the cluster configuration I should assign an ip address to each security module&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;• Regarding the data interfaces we will have Eth1/1 to Eth1/4 as data interface member of Portchannel 10&lt;BR /&gt;So is that means that the same physical interface is shared between the two security modules ? and no need to assig a different physical interface to each SM ?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I hope that you got my point &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":smiling_face_with_smiling_eyes:"&gt;😊&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 17:02:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-inter-chassis-cluster/m-p/3838205#M921776</guid>
      <dc:creator>kareali@cisco.com</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-21T17:02:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: FTD inter-chassis cluster</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-inter-chassis-cluster/m-p/3838340#M921777</link>
      <description>Management interface is shared among the modules in a chassis, which means you only 1 management interface is required.&lt;BR /&gt;Same with data port-channel interface.</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 14 Apr 2019 21:00:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/ftd-inter-chassis-cluster/m-p/3838340#M921777</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ilkin</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-04-14T21:00:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

