Security Engineers Still Struggle with BGP on Firewalls
Why Do Security Engineers Still Struggle with BGP on Firewalls?
Most network engineers are completely comfortable running BGP on routers. But when the same protocol is implemented on a next-gen firewall, everything behaves differently — and that’s where things get complicated.
We recently reviewed an official Palo Alto Networks technical guide on configuring BGP for real-world perimeter designs. It’s a well-structured document published by their documentation team, and it provides clarity on scenarios that often trip up even experienced engineers.
What the Guide Covers
Full-mesh, multi-homed eBGP deployments
Active/Passive HA with dual ISP links
Active/Active HA with independent peerings
Import/export rules & redistribution profiles
Verification commands and expected outputs
Palo Alto walks through two practical designs, both using dual ISPs in different HA modes. The guide also highlights subtle but critical details — for example, why certain routes should be redistributed using “connect” instead of “bgp”.
A key point they emphasize:
Palo Alto firewalls are not intended to operate as full BGP route processors.
They recommend importing only default routes or selective summaries, not full internet tables.
Why This Matters
BGP misconfigurations on firewalls continue to be one of the most common blind spots in perimeter security. As environments grow more complex, understanding how routing interacts with HA, NAT, sessions, and stateful inspection becomes essential.
We’re sharing this resource in the SMEnode security channel to help engineers avoid outages, routing loops, and long troubleshooting cycles.
#NetworkArchitecture #PaloAltoNetworks
#perimetersecurity #HighAvailability