<?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: PAN/MNT hybrid question. in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925090#M457087</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Yeah, there are maximums for a particular appliance and then separate maximums for the deployment as a whole.&amp;nbsp; It can be confusing at times.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2019 17:11:20 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Colby LeMaire</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-09-16T17:11:20Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>PAN/MNT hybrid question.</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925058#M457080</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Have some ISE 3595's on the shelf.&amp;nbsp; (understand these are EOS as of March).&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Need to get them off the shelf and deployed. Believe there's a total of 40K possible endpoints at this time.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Question regarding Hybrid deployment with the PAN+MNT in the same 3595.&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;6 X 3595 appliances.&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The thought is to put 3 in each DC (2 Datacenters).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;PAN +MNT running on one appliance with two PSNs in each data centers.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Split the load by configuring NADs in an odd / even fashion so that only in a DC failure situation does one deployment have all end points.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is this possible with the PAN+MnT in same appliance?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Obviously there's no HA, it would be failover from one DC to the other based on field configs on switches using primary and secondary radius configurations.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If this is possible, what are the drawbacks.&amp;nbsp; I am concerned about the PAN + MnT in one appliance during any situation where the MnT is handling massive amounts of traffic.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If you need more information, please me know.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;All thoughts welcome.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-Jason&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:37:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925058#M457080</guid>
      <dc:creator>JasonMahan</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-09-16T16:37:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PAN/MNT hybrid question.</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925080#M457082</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Your scenario would be fine except that when the Admin/MnT are combined in one appliance, the maximum concurrent sessions supported for the overall deployment is 20K.&amp;nbsp; In order to scale above 20K, you would need to have dedicated appliances for Admin and MnT.&amp;nbsp; Scalability numbers are in the link below:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;FONT&gt;&lt;A href="https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/ise/2-6/install_guide/b_ise_InstallationGuide_26/b_ise_InstallationGuide_26_chapter_00.html#id_101614" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/ise/2-6/install_guide/b_ise_InstallationGuide_26/b_ise_InstallationGuide_26_chapter_00.html#id_101614&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2019 17:03:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925080#M457082</guid>
      <dc:creator>Colby LeMaire</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-09-16T17:03:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PAN/MNT hybrid question.</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925085#M457085</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you Colby!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When reading the documentation, I misread it as 20K per PSN not the entire deployment.&amp;nbsp; Based on the limitation that makes sense.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2019 17:09:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925085#M457085</guid>
      <dc:creator>JasonMahan</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-09-16T17:09:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PAN/MNT hybrid question.</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925090#M457087</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yeah, there are maximums for a particular appliance and then separate maximums for the deployment as a whole.&amp;nbsp; It can be confusing at times.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2019 17:11:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925090#M457087</guid>
      <dc:creator>Colby LeMaire</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-09-16T17:11:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PAN/MNT hybrid question.</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925099#M457088</link>
      <description>So if I read this right, does that mean a single 3595 PSN can support 40K endpoints if I have a separate 3595 as Admin and another 3595 as MnT? If that works we could grow PSNs as budget and time permits. Moving to 3600s over time.&lt;BR /&gt;Does that make sense?</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2019 17:25:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925099#M457088</guid>
      <dc:creator>JasonMahan</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-09-16T17:25:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: PAN/MNT hybrid question.</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925108#M457089</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;That is correct.&amp;nbsp; The 3595 as a PSN can handle 40K sessions itself assuming the Admin and MnT nodes are on their own separate/dedicated appliances.&amp;nbsp; So with 6 appliances, you would have 2 for Admin (Pri/Sec), 2 for MnT (Pri/Sec), and 2 for PSN functionality.&amp;nbsp; In that scenario, the deployment as a whole could handle over 20K sessions but then you run into limitations on each PSN individually and have to add PSNs to scale higher.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2019 17:43:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/pan-mnt-hybrid-question/m-p/3925108#M457089</guid>
      <dc:creator>Colby LeMaire</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-09-16T17:43:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

