# HA between GTM **URL:** \ **Category:** Technical Forums\ **Tags:** security, application-delivery\ **Created:** [June 4, 2023, 8:11pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443 "2023-06-04T20:11:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Amr\_Ali](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/amr_ali/32/33572_2.png) [@Amr\_Ali](https://community.f5.com/u/Amr_Ali)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2023, 8:11pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/1 "2023-06-04T20:11:42Z")
Hello, how we can make HA between two GTM boxes at the same datacenter ---
**Author:** ![Paulius](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/paulius/32/21698_2.png) [@Paulius](https://community.f5.com/u/Paulius)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2023, 11:16pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/2 "2023-06-04T23:16:15Z")
@Amr_Ali Do you mean having an HA device much like you have HA LTMs? If that’s a yes you really don’t have to do that because GTMs are inherently redundant for DNS because of how the sync works between them for DNS configuration. You might need them to be HA because they run multiple functions such as GTM, LTM, AFM, and so on but you should try and keep GTM off of the same box as those other services if possible. ---
**Author:** ![whisperer](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/whisperer/32/13906_2.png) [@whisperer](https://community.f5.com/u/whisperer)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2023, 11:56pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/3 "2023-06-04T23:56:00Z")
I agree with  @Paulius 100%. If the F5 BIG-IPs only running GTM as dedicated module, no need for HA! Use GTM sync group and publish both listener addresses for DNS… or setup DNS anycast. If in HA, you don’t have BOTH units responding to DNS (normal setup), but if both are standalone and part of the same GTM sync group, then you still have resiliency and depend on iQuery between both GTM instances and DNS for failover. If running more modules… like LTM and/or ASM the conversation changes. Most clients with run dedicated smaller devices for GTM/DNS only, and a bigger device for all other ADC functions. ---
**Author:** ![JRahm](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/jrahm/32/3327_2.png) [@JRahm](https://community.f5.com/u/JRahm)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2023, 9:53pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/4 "2023-06-05T21:53:00Z")
![mando.jpg](https://d20hrnpixdzcsd.cloudfront.net/original/2X/3/31a20a3319f600f156a9e79cb22864446636bb33.jpeg) ---
**Author:** ![Amr\_Ali](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/amr_ali/32/33572_2.png) [@Amr\_Ali](https://community.f5.com/u/Amr_Ali)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2023, 10:29pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/5 "2023-06-05T22:29:50Z")
hello whisperer, I need to make HA between two GTM boxes at the same location ( datacenter ) not in different locations ---
**Author:** ![JRahm](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/jrahm/32/3327_2.png) [@JRahm](https://community.f5.com/u/JRahm)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2023, 10:34pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/6 "2023-06-05T22:34:30Z")
Hi @Amr_Ali  if they are standalone GTM devices, this is not a recommended configuration. Better to make them both active and in the sync group. ---
**Author:** ![Amr\_Ali](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/amr_ali/32/33572_2.png) [@Amr\_Ali](https://community.f5.com/u/Amr_Ali)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2023, 10:39pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/7 "2023-06-05T22:39:00Z")
so in this case when I configured them in sync group , both GTM will be active ???!!! is there any way to make one of them active and the other one on standby ---
**Author:** ![JRahm](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/jrahm/32/3327_2.png) [@JRahm](https://community.f5.com/u/JRahm)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2023, 10:42pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/8 "2023-06-05T22:42:11Z")
the sync group is just to make sure all configs are synced when changes are made in the sync group. The individual GTMs will get requests based on the NS records established on zones. If you really want only one to respond, then HA is the way to go, but I’m curious to understand the use case of sidelining one of them? ---
**Author:** ![Amr\_Ali](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/amr_ali/32/33572_2.png) [@Amr\_Ali](https://community.f5.com/u/Amr_Ali)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2023, 10:53pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/9 "2023-06-05T22:53:01Z")
thanks,  @JRahm   just i wanted to know if it was applicable or not to make thim in HA and make one active and the other one standby like LTM or WAF ---
**Author:** ![JRahm](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/jrahm/32/3327_2.png) [@JRahm](https://community.f5.com/u/JRahm)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2023, 11:01pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/10 "2023-06-05T23:01:11Z")
It was at one time for sure, and I had one environment when I was a customer that it was required, even though F5 advised against doing so. [Here’s the guide for that](https://techdocs.f5.com/kb/en-us/products/big-ip_gtm/manuals/product/gtm-implementations-11-6-0/13.html), but version is very old. I’d ask your account team to give you a definitive answer on whether support endorses these days. ---
**Author:** ![Paulius](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/paulius/32/21698_2.png) [@Paulius](https://community.f5.com/u/Paulius)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2023, 11:31pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/11 "2023-06-05T23:31:19Z")
@Amr_Ali If you would like to have two GTMs in the same location be HA in an active/standby configuration it is possible but it is a big money sink to do such a thing since GTMs themselves are inherently HA when in active/active. You really should have two GTMs run as standalone GTMs in a sync group to keep their DNS configuration synced between them but respond to DNS queries individually. If you had a much high DNS traffic configuration even then you probably wouldn’t place the GTMs in active/standby but rather just in a larger group of GTMs so they can all respond to queries and if one fails the rest will continue to respond while you replace the failed GTM. As @JRahm stated his article should walk you through an active/standby setup but you really should have your user or group provide information that 100% supports the setup of active/standby GTMs rather than the normal standalone active/active setup that F5 recommends configuring. ---
**Author:** ![PowerRangers](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/powerrangers/32/24407_2.png) [@PowerRangers](https://community.f5.com/u/PowerRangers)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2024, 8:11pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/12 "2024-07-15T20:11:27Z")
_So, I see the above comments and have something similar story now._ _We are in the process of upgrading from the Guest GTM to a new Tenant GTM appliance. Our plan involves adding the new GTM to the cluster sync-group, performing a manual full synchronization, and monitoring its performance for a day. Once verified, we intend to gracefully take the old GTM offline. If all functions well with the new GTM, we will then remove the high availability configuration and proceed with cleaning up the old GTM. Any suggestions or recommendations on this approach?_ ---
**Author:** ![Paulius](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/paulius/32/21698_2.png) [@Paulius](https://community.f5.com/u/Paulius)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2024, 6:32pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/13 "2024-07-18T18:32:28Z")
By HA configuration do you mean the GTM sync group or are you referring to HA configuration of the entire F5 device? If you are referring only to the sync group that syncs GTM configuration then this should work. ---
**Author:** ![PowerRangers](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/powerrangers/32/24407_2.png) [@PowerRangers](https://community.f5.com/u/PowerRangers)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2024, 6:43pm UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/14 "2024-07-18T18:43:42Z")
so, the box is dedicated for GTM. so by doing GTM-Sync-Group will all the device configs will be replicated like users/certs/settings? or only GTM stuff will be replicated? I want it to be a replica of the existing GTM device with all general settings along with GTM stuff so I can cut over once everything is ok. ---
**Author:** ![Paulius](https://d1p9zq3aats0t8.cloudfront.net/user_avatar/community.f5.com/paulius/32/21698_2.png) [@Paulius](https://community.f5.com/u/Paulius)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2024, 4:11am UTC](https://community.f5.com/t/ha-between-gtm/72443/15 "2024-07-19T04:11:45Z")
If this is a GTM what other configuration are you referencing? If you have the GTM in the sync group it will replicate all GTM configuration between the GTM devices in the sync group, less their unique configuration such as self-IPs, routes, and so on.