<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Route Data based on Heavy Forwarder Host? in Getting Data In</title>
    <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Route-Data-based-on-Heavy-Forwarder-Host/m-p/468012#M80585</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Nope, no luck. It still sends to both deployments. I asked on the slack group and they mentioned HF to Intermediate HF routing does not work unless you do some "hacks" and that it works for UF but not HF unsure if this is true as ive read documentation that seem to state its possible..&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2020 03:13:18 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>ajiwanand</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-06-02T03:13:18Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Route Data based on Heavy Forwarder Host?</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Route-Data-based-on-Heavy-Forwarder-Host/m-p/468010#M80583</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We're approaching this from an MSSP standpoint.&lt;BR /&gt;
We're looking at having an intermediate forwarder layer where we route data in a shared layer based on the client heavy forwarders.&lt;BR /&gt;
Essentially it would go Client HF -&amp;gt; Intermediate Forwarder Layers Route based on host -&amp;gt; Client Indexer&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Is this possible? I cant seem to get the props/transforms config to work &lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;props.conf&lt;BR /&gt;
[default]&lt;BR /&gt;
TRANSFORMS-setrouting = tsthost-routing&lt;BR /&gt;
TRANSFORMS-setrouting = abchost-routing&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;transforms.conf&lt;BR /&gt;
[tsthost-routing]&lt;BR /&gt;
SOURCE_KEY = MetaData:Host&lt;BR /&gt;
REGEX = (hf1_tst)&lt;BR /&gt;
DEST_KEY = _TCP_ROUTING&lt;BR /&gt;
FORMAT = client-tst-lb-indexers&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;[abchost-routing]&lt;BR /&gt;
SOURCE_KEY = MetaData:Host&lt;BR /&gt;
REGEX = (hf1_abc)&lt;BR /&gt;
DEST_KEY = _TCP_ROUTING&lt;BR /&gt;
FORMAT = client-abc-lb-indexers&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Im aware of potential parsing issues as well and well be evaluating that.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2020 05:35:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Route-Data-based-on-Heavy-Forwarder-Host/m-p/468010#M80583</guid>
      <dc:creator>ajiwanand</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-30T05:35:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Route Data based on Heavy Forwarder Host?</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Route-Data-based-on-Heavy-Forwarder-Host/m-p/468011#M80584</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;@ajiwanand Can you try including both transforms stanza in one-&lt;BR /&gt;
props.conf&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE&gt;[default]
TRANSFORMS-setrouting = tsthost-routing, abchost-routing
&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2020 02:06:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Route-Data-based-on-Heavy-Forwarder-Host/m-p/468011#M80584</guid>
      <dc:creator>493669</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-06-02T02:06:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Route Data based on Heavy Forwarder Host?</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Route-Data-based-on-Heavy-Forwarder-Host/m-p/468012#M80585</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Nope, no luck. It still sends to both deployments. I asked on the slack group and they mentioned HF to Intermediate HF routing does not work unless you do some "hacks" and that it works for UF but not HF unsure if this is true as ive read documentation that seem to state its possible..&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2020 03:13:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Route-Data-based-on-Heavy-Forwarder-Host/m-p/468012#M80585</guid>
      <dc:creator>ajiwanand</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-06-02T03:13:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Route Data based on Heavy Forwarder Host?</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Route-Data-based-on-Heavy-Forwarder-Host/m-p/468013#M80586</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;if the client has dedicated indexers, why not have the client HF send directly to them using outputs.conf?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2020 12:49:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Route-Data-based-on-Heavy-Forwarder-Host/m-p/468013#M80586</guid>
      <dc:creator>richgalloway</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-06-02T12:49:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Route Data based on Heavy Forwarder Host?</title>
      <link>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Route-Data-based-on-Heavy-Forwarder-Host/m-p/468014#M80587</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Lots of reasons, mainly the deployment is hosted on AWS and getting push back from security for having an internet gateway, so we're trying to propose a separate VPC with an intermediate forwarding layer connected to the deployment VPCs over a private link. &lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2020 13:50:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.splunk.com/t5/Getting-Data-In/Route-Data-based-on-Heavy-Forwarder-Host/m-p/468014#M80587</guid>
      <dc:creator>ajiwanand</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-06-02T13:50:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

