mailing list archives
Re: Concentrator inside of paired failover firewalls.
From: Aaron Smith <smitha () byui edu>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 11:44:21 -0600
On Sun, 2006-09-17 at 16:35 -0700, Carson Gaspar wrote:
There are _zero_ reliable commercial HA solutions that will go insane if
you use a cross-over cable and they both loose link at the same time.
So, PIX is not a reliable commercial solution then. OK.
you use 2 switches, and the trunk between them fails, both devices think
they are "up" (yes, you can use multiple trunks, but you can use multiple
x-overs as well - keep it apples to apples). If you use a cross-over cable,
and it fails, both devices think they are "down". Any decent HA system can
handle both failure modes.
Then PIX is also not a decent HA system. Great.
If an HA system _can't_ handle both failure
modes, it's crap and you shouldn't buy it.
PIX (using IP failover) is crap. I get it now.
As a final note, using a crossover cable with a PIX is very stupid. If
you keep the pair in the same room then use the failover cable.
IP-based failover is useful if the PIX pair is geographically separated,
in which case they'd most likely be homed to different switches. Which
was my initial point.
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () listserv icsalabs com
Re: Concentrator inside of paired failover firewalls. Nate Carlson (Sep 15)