Skip to main content

High Availability - Cisco ASA vs Fortigate

I participated in a discussion about a High Availability feature on Cisco ASA and FortiGate. We were talking about active-active, active-passive and active-standby modes. What was funny, we talked about the same features using different names. Yes, Cisco and Fortinet, they use different names for the same features. Let me explain it to avoid similar misunderstanding.

1) Cisco ASA 

They are two modes available:

a) active/standby - the method is available only in standalone mode. The concept is simple: you have two devices: a primary and a secondary. When it possible the primary is an active device and the secondary a standby. Only one device (active) processes traffic and the standby waits passively, monitoring the status of the active one. When failure happens (failure of the device, an interface, etc.), it triggers a fail-over and the secondary (standby)  becomes the active one (secondary/active).



b) active/active - this mode is only available in multi-context mode. You have to decide which context should be an active on which unit. The concept is to load the traffic more or less equally on both units: the primary and the secondary. When one unit is not available, all contexts are in the active mode on the working one.




 2) FortiGate

Fortinet proposes more scenarios. Let's see how they work.

a) active/passive - this mode works pretty much the same as the active/standby on Cisco ASA. One device is actively processing the traffic and the passive one only monitors the active one.When the passive stops receiving heartbeats from the active unit, it takes over the active role.



b) active/active- Fortigate supports up to four units and one unit is a primary one. It receives all traffic and then it decides which unit will process a particular session. When for example unit #3 is down, the primary one stops off-loading sessions to this one. When something happens to the active/primary one, the rest of active units elect a new active/primary one.




c) active/passive - virtual clustering - this one is very often mixed with active/active (by Cisco engineers). This scenario is limited to two physical units and it works very similar to active/active Cisco ASA. You set a priority on each VDOM to decide which VDOM should be active on the Unit #1 and #2.




 
Glossary:

Security Context (Cisco ASA) and VDOM (Fortinet) - virtual instance on the physical device. You can have many of them and each acts as an independent device with own: operational mode, IP addressing, interfaces, administrators, policies, routing, etc.
  


Resources:

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/asa/asa910/configuration/general/asa-910-general-config/ha-failover.html#ID-2107-00000b19

https://docs.fortinet.com/d/fortigate-ha-60

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What should you know about HA 'override enabled' setting on Fortigate?

High availability is mandatory in most of today's network designs. Only very small companies or branches can run their business without redundancy. When you have Fortigate firewall in your network you have many options to increase network availability. You can use Fortigate Clustering Protocol ( FGCP ) or Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol ( VRRP ). FGCP has two modes: 'override' disabled (default) and 'override' enabled . I'm not going to explain how to set up HA as you can find many resources on Fortinet websites: https://cookbook.fortinet.com/high-availability-two-fortigates-56/ https://cookbook.fortinet.com/high-availability-with-fgcp-56/ Let's recap what is the main difference between them. The default HA setting is 'override' disabled and this is an order of selection an active unit: 1) number of monitored interfaces - when both units have the same number of working (up) interfaces check next parameter 2) HA uptime - an

FortiGate and GRE tunnel

Recently I worked on one project where a client requested to re-route web traffic to the GRE tunnel to perform traffic inspection. I would like to share with you what is required if you configure it on FortiGate. We need a new GRE interface and policy base routing (PBR) to change the route for specific source IPs. Of course you need firewall policies to permit the traffic. Let's start with GRE interface. Unfortunately you can't configure it using the GUI, only CLI is the option: config system gre-tunnel edit "gre1" set interface "port1" set local-gw 55.55.55.55 set remote-gw 44.44.44.44 next end When the end peer is Cisco router, you need to set the IP for the GRE interface: config system interface edit gre1 set ip 192.168.10.10 255.255.255.255 set remote-ip192.168.10.20 end In next step we need to fix routing. We need the alternate path via GRE but to keep the route in the active routing table you need to set the same AD (adminis

Inpection of asymmetric sessions on FortiGate

There is one feature available on FortiGate, and I think you should know it, as it modifies a bit what we know about stateful firewalls. In past every packet was treated individually and you had to create policies in both directions. With stateful firewalls we can track connections, and by checking couple of attributes, we can treat them as part of the same session. For example when you initiate connection from a host1 to host2, the returning connection from host2 to host1 will be treated as part of the same connection (session). They have to have the same source/destination and destination/source IPs, port numbers and interfaces.There is an exception from this rule and FortiGate in some specific cases can accept connections on port which was not used in the initial connection. Let me explain how it works on the below example:      The host1 has a default gateway on R1 (10.0.1.2), but you may notice that it is not the optimal path to host2 subnet. When we analyze the packet flo