<?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: ISE in two different countries in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693052#M25222</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;It would have to be a single deployment.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Ideally it would be 4 nodes so that the PAN/MnT Primary and Secondary personae are on two hosts in Europe.&amp;nbsp;Then put one each PSN in Europe and Australia.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If you made it only two nodes you would be pushing the limits for replication over that much latency (probably around 300+ ms).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;See also this tool for ISE bandwidth considerations:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/security-documents/ise-latency-and-bandwidth-calculators/ta-p/3641112" target="_blank"&gt;https://community.cisco.com/t5/security-documents/ise-latency-and-bandwidth-calculators/ta-p/3641112&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2018 15:36:18 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Marvin Rhoads</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2018-08-22T15:36:18Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ISE in two different countries</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3692911#M25220</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Got a request from a customer.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;They have a data center in Europe and 1 in Australia. The link between them is an MPLS. They would like&amp;nbsp; to have 1 ISE in Europe (primary) and 1 in Australia (Secondary)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;They have about 300 routers and switches and they would like to have below setup:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;OL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;All equipment points to the Primary ISE for TACACS in Europe for AAA&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;Should the Europe ISE be unreachable , all authentication sessions should be sent to the Australian ISE(Secondary).&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/OL&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The requirement here is that the ISE should be in some kind of cluster , meaning every changes performed on the primary ISE should be replicated to the secondary ISE. Be it password update , new device etc..&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Is this feasible?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 08:48:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3692911#M25220</guid>
      <dc:creator>marine253</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T08:48:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE in two different countries</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693035#M25221</link>
      <description>If you’re talking about synchronization of 2 different ISE deployments then no there is no such option &lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2018 15:14:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693035#M25221</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jason Kunst</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-08-22T15:14:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE in two different countries</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693052#M25222</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;It would have to be a single deployment.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Ideally it would be 4 nodes so that the PAN/MnT Primary and Secondary personae are on two hosts in Europe.&amp;nbsp;Then put one each PSN in Europe and Australia.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If you made it only two nodes you would be pushing the limits for replication over that much latency (probably around 300+ ms).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;See also this tool for ISE bandwidth considerations:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/security-documents/ise-latency-and-bandwidth-calculators/ta-p/3641112" target="_blank"&gt;https://community.cisco.com/t5/security-documents/ise-latency-and-bandwidth-calculators/ta-p/3641112&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2018 15:36:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693052#M25222</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marvin Rhoads</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-08-22T15:36:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE in two different countries</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693076#M25223</link>
      <description>Thanks.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Ideally it would be 4 nodes so that the PAN/MnT Primary and Secondary personae are on two hosts in Europe. Then put one each PSN in Europe and Australia.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Are you talking about 4 physical boxes with 1 persona per box?&lt;BR /&gt;Meaning 3 boxes in europe and 1 box in australia? Won't it break the 300ms rule you mentioned?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;If you made it only two nodes you would be pushing the limits for replication over that much latency (probably around 300+ ms).&lt;BR /&gt;Meaning 1 box with all 3 personas in europe and another box with all 3 personas in Australia? The actual latency is not that bad. 60 ms.&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2018 16:08:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693076#M25223</guid>
      <dc:creator>marine253</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-08-22T16:08:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE in two different countries</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693088#M25224</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Latency between Europe and Australia is typically a bit over 300 ms. Design guidance is that we shouldn't exceed that so you'd be pushing the limit.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Take a look at BRKSEC-3699 on ciscolive.com for ideas/constraints on ISE deployments.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;As was noted earlier two separate deployments have no knowledge of each other.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;A 4 node deployment has:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;a. Node 1 = Primary PAN / Secondary MnT&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;b. Node 2 = Secondary PAN / Primary MnT&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;c. Nodes 3 and 4 = PSNs.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2018 16:20:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693088#M25224</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marvin Rhoads</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-08-22T16:20:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE in two different countries</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693220#M25225</link>
      <description>Right so if 2 deployments then latency between nodes doesn’t matter as they are colocated together &lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2018 19:19:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693220#M25225</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jason Kunst</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-08-22T19:19:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE in two different countries</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693451#M25227</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello Marvin,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thank you for the detailed explanation.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I've only deployed ISE for very small deployment. Please bear with me. &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;So to sum up, i am going to propose below options to the customer:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;FONT color="#FF0000"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Scenario 1:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;We do 2 independent ISE deployments , that is 1 ISE in each country. Each ISE will have 1 IP and all routers/switches should be configured with dual TACACS servers. Each ISE will be managed seperately and no sync of policies will happen.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT color="#FF0000"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Scenario 2:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;A 4 node deployment (as proposed above):&lt;BR /&gt;a. Node 1 = Primary PAN / Secondary MnT&lt;BR /&gt;b. Node 2 = Secondary PAN / Primary MnT&lt;BR /&gt;c. Nodes 3 and 4 = PSNs.&lt;BR /&gt;QU1) That is 3 nodes in Europe and 1 node in Australia. Correct?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;QU2)&lt;/SPAN&gt;They will all sync together and policies/configuration will be performed on Node 1 only (Primary PAN). Correct?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;QU3)&lt;/SPAN&gt;All routers/switches should be configured with dual TACACS servers (as we have two PSNs). correct?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;QU4)&lt;/SPAN&gt;What will happen if the Europe DC is unreachable. Will a manual intervention be required on the PSN in Australia to make it functional?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;QU5) All the MnT personas will be in Europe. If Europe&amp;nbsp;is unreachable , this mean that no logging will happen when the Australian PSN will be servicing requests?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Thanks a lot in advance &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2018 04:30:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3693451#M25227</guid>
      <dc:creator>marine253</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-08-23T04:30:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE in two different countries</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3695947#M25229</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Marvin,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;sorry to pester you. Could you please vet the above setup? :). I really need to know if the above is correct.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2018 06:17:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3695947#M25229</guid>
      <dc:creator>marine253</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-08-28T06:17:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE in two different countries</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3696008#M25230</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/128604"&gt;@marine253&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;You can use partner helpdesk for official vetting of presales configurations. Opinions I offer here are my own and not official from either Cisco or my employers.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The two scenarios you mentioned are correct as stated.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Re your other questions,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;1. Yes.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;2. Yes.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;3. Yes. Each network devices should have the TACACS server (PSN) closest to it first in its aaa server-group. something like this:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;aaa group server tacacs+ ise-tacacs
 server name &amp;lt;name of local tacacs server&amp;gt;
 server name &amp;lt;name of remote tacacs server&amp;gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;4. A PSN can operate and enforce configured policies whether or not the PAN (or MnT) node is accessible.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;5. I believe some very limited messages may be queued on the PSN if there is a momentary loss of connectivity to the MnT nodes but, in general, you will lose accounting logs if the MnT is not reachable for any extended period of time.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2018 08:36:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-in-two-different-countries/m-p/3696008#M25230</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marvin Rhoads</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-08-28T08:36:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

