cisco_trooper wrote: » Is there any way to use an SLA monitor object to force the ASA to failover?
unclerico wrote: » What kind of proxy and is it an absolute requirement to be inline??
Ahriakin wrote: » Is it a Layer3+ proxy or a Layer 2 transparent filter (bump in the wire)? It sounds more like the latter. As long as you have the interface in question monitored the ASA can still register failure beyond the link being physically down, if it receives no hellos on the interface after half the hold time it begins a series of connectivity tests, if they all fail but the Secondary is still okay (and your Failover interface-policy allows) it will failover. Now the problem is the tests are very simple,; Are Any packets RX on that interface?, Arp Requests to the last 2 cached address and finally a broadcast Ping. If it receives packets at any point during testing it will not fail the interface. So if your proxy responds basically you're still hosed, if you can work out a way to stop it responding in anyway on the interface facing the ASA you might get this to work. Also you'd need to set your interface policy to failover at 1 IF failure. It's not likely this will work for you though.
cisco_trooper wrote: » The tech we talked to yesterday suggested that it is a transparent proxy, but through messing with it I tend to disagree, assuming my definition of transparent is the same as his. The inside and outside (x0 and x1) interfaces, get configured with the same IP address (W T F, right?). There is an ability, and apparently a requirement, to add static routes to this device. That alone along with IP address assignment disqualifies it from being transparent in my mind.
unclerico wrote: » Yeah, in looking at the admin guide for that appliance it looks like it is a hard requirement for it to be placed in line. It looks like there is the ability to purchase a failover unit and configure IP monitoring. What do you have set for the failover delay on the ASA's?? If you adjust the heartbeat interval and the failover trigger level on the SonicWalls to be something shorter than the failover delay on the ASA's you could potentially force the SonicWalls to failover. Other than that you should look at another solution that will allow you more options for placement in your network.
cisco_trooper wrote: » Yeah. Talked to some vendors today and I'm going to look into trying out a pair of St Bernard iPrism devices. Not sure how that is going to go since I haven't heard of them before, but initial inspection of their website etc looks promising. Hope this works out because I know the powers that be aren't going to pony up the $$$ for WebSense.Web Filter for Enterprise