From: Khawar Butt (khawarb@khawarb.com)
Date: Tue Oct 16 2007 - 10:54:18 ART
The better word for Active/Active is Load Sharing. It shares the load of
the two contexts over two physcial firewalls.
Khawar Butt
CCIE#12353 (R/S , Security , SP , Voice)
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Tony Schaffran
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 7:03 PM
To: sheherezada@gmail.com; 'Cisco certification'
Subject: RE: ASA active-active question
The whole Active/Active load balancing thing is just a big illusion that
Cisco has created.
I hate this because when I explain the reality to my customers, they are
extremely disappointed and I have to do damage control caused by the
sales team.
As you have described it, one ASA is active for one context and the
other ASA is active for the other context.
They will not load balance a single context across both ASA's.
Tony Schaffran
Network Analyst
CCIE #11071
CCNP, CCNA, CCDA,
NNCDS, NNCSS, CNE, MCSE
www.cconlinelabs.com
Your #1 choice for online Cisco rack rentals.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
sheherezada@gmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 5:17 AM
To: Cisco certification
Subject: ASA active-active question
Hi,
Given:
- two ASA configured for active/active failover
- two security contexts
I know that I can actually load balance so that one ASA be active for
one context and another one be active for the other context. What
happens to traffic received on the secondary IP address (i.e. received
by the ASA that is not active for a given context)? Does the secondary
pass through the traffic? In other words, can I load balance in the
same context? (guess not, but I don't have the ASAs to
experiment)
Thanks,
Mihai
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Nov 16 2007 - 13:11:15 ART