<?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 Deploymet - which ise has processed the request in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991688#M586150</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;For redundancy, you want both ISEs to behave in the same way. For the redirect, by default, the ISE uses the FQDN of the ISE that handles the request. No need to configure two different authorization profiles.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 11:04:47 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Karsten Iwen</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-01-08T11:04:47Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991632#M586144</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;Hello&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;,&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;I&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;have&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;an&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;ISE&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;deployment&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;consisting&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;of&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;2&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;nodes&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;.&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;However, for the policy set I need to know which ISE processed the request. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;If I look in the Radius log, there is a Policy Server item and then the host name of the ISE. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;How can I check in my Authorization Profile which ISE has processed it so that I can return a different result?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 09:29:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991632#M586144</guid>
      <dc:creator>mgollob</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T09:29:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991637#M586145</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;- The need for this requirement is unclear for me and not possible because from Policy (policies) Server (implemented) to handling is a one way flow&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; ;&amp;nbsp; &lt;EM&gt;please elaborate if needed ,&amp;nbsp;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;M.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 09:33:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991637#M586145</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mark Elsen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T09:33:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991639#M586146</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;check below&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;MHM&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 12:07:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991639#M586146</guid>
      <dc:creator>MHM Cisco World</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T12:07:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991648#M586147</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Try "ISE Host Name" from the "Network Access" directory. But you should better tell what you want to achieve. My first impression is that it is likely a horrible idea that you have here.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 09:45:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991648#M586147</guid>
      <dc:creator>Karsten Iwen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T09:45:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991672#M586148</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;I am in the process of implementing an ISE Guest solution and have a deployment with 2 nodes. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;I need 2 authorization profiles, each with a different redirect link to the guest portal, depending on which ISE is processing the request and therefore I need to know which PSN is processing it so that I can provide the correct link. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;It&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;is&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;for&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;redundancy&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;reasons&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r hover:bg-[#B4DAE8] hover:dark:bg-blue-next-600"&gt;.&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 10:29:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991672#M586148</guid>
      <dc:creator>mgollob</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T10:29:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991677#M586149</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;so your NAD is WLC&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;do you config both ISE under WLAN ?&lt;BR /&gt;MHM&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 10:45:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991677#M586149</guid>
      <dc:creator>MHM Cisco World</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T10:45:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991688#M586150</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;For redundancy, you want both ISEs to behave in the same way. For the redirect, by default, the ISE uses the FQDN of the ISE that handles the request. No need to configure two different authorization profiles.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 11:04:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991688#M586150</guid>
      <dc:creator>Karsten Iwen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T11:04:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991713#M586151</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;you are correct&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;let me check this point&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;FQDN is not relate to this case&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;MHM&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 11:50:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991713#M586151</guid>
      <dc:creator>MHM Cisco World</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T11:50:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991768#M586152</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-2-1-multiple-psns-with-cwa-guest-without-load-balancer/td-p/3534288" target="_blank"&gt;https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-2-1-multiple-psns-with-cwa-guest-without-load-balancer/td-p/3534288&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;as I mention you are correct&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;the issue is two ISE need load balance&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;if there is no then you need two authz profile&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;check link I share&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;the FQDN is not relate to anything here&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;MHM&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 12:06:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4991768#M586152</guid>
      <dc:creator>MHM Cisco World</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T12:06:46Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4992083#M586158</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;In the ISE LiveLogs, there is a &lt;STRONG&gt;Server&lt;/STRONG&gt; column that tells you clearly by name which ISE node/PSN handled the request. Make sure you have the column enabled and you may need to scroll far to the right to see it for a LiveLog entry.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="thomas_0-1704728653794.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/206646iC51A86A49445F91B/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="thomas_0-1704728653794.png" alt="thomas_0-1704728653794.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;As others have mentioned, you typically want your policy to be &lt;EM&gt;consistent&lt;/EM&gt; between all ISE nodes otherwise it can be complicated.&amp;nbsp; However, if you are &lt;EM&gt;absolutely certain&lt;/EM&gt; you want this, you may create a Policy Set Authorization Rule that uses the condition &lt;FONT face="courier new,courier"&gt;Network Access:ISE Hostname EQUALS &lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&lt;FONT face="courier new,courier"&gt;ise-name&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/EM&gt; .&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="thomas_1-1704728963689.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/206647i34F9CAB8B4B09987/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="thomas_1-1704728963689.png" alt="thomas_1-1704728963689.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 15:52:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4992083#M586158</guid>
      <dc:creator>thomas</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T15:52:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4992084#M586159</link>
      <description>&lt;P data-unlink="true"&gt;&lt;SPAN class="UserName lia-user-name lia-user-rank-VIP lia-component-message-view-widget-author-username"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;thank you very much &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt; yes this solution also worked for me, but I don't need it anymore because Karsten Iwen's answer worked perfectly. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;I just removed the static entry and it automatically uses the PSN from which the request is processed &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P data-unlink="true"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 15:58:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4992084#M586159</guid>
      <dc:creator>mgollob</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T15:58:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4992090#M586160</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Sorry &lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/26555"&gt;@thomas&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;So can confirm that he can use both ISE as redundacy for CWA without F5 ?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks alot&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;MHM&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 16:04:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4992090#M586160</guid>
      <dc:creator>MHM Cisco World</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T16:04:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4992106#M586161</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;yes, no load balancer is needed for the guest portal, as long as it is okay to have two different domains. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;Depending on which ISE is processing the request, the correct fqdn will be returned if it has not been entered statically. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="--l --r sentence_highlight"&gt;If this is entered statically, you can do it with a second authorization profile and a check with the hostname and return a different redirect link.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 16:10:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4992106#M586161</guid>
      <dc:creator>mgollob</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T16:10:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Deploymet - which ise has processed the request</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4992142#M586162</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/1065752"&gt;@MHM Cisco World&lt;/a&gt; , you want multiple ISE nodes for AAA (RADIUS/TACACS+) service redundancy.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;ISE is &lt;EM&gt;not a load balancer&lt;/EM&gt; and will not magically forward or balance requests between two ISE nodes. For this you still need an actual load balancer. Watch the ISE Webinar &lt;SPAN&gt;▷&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;A class="" style="background-color: #e5e5e5; color: #155bda; font-family: Avenir, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal;" title="https://youtu.be/SSOa75rGofk" href="https://youtu.be/SSOa75rGofk" data-from-md="" target="_blank"&gt;Cloud Load Balancing with ISE&lt;/A&gt; for more details and examples.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If your network devices send all requests to the same ISE node without a load balancer, only one ISE node will receive and handle the requests.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 17:03:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-deploymet-which-ise-has-processed-the-request/m-p/4992142#M586162</guid>
      <dc:creator>thomas</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-01-08T17:03:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

