<?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: Cisco ISE NIC Bonding in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/cisco-ise-nic-bonding/m-p/5172030#M591687</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;The switch interface config on both switche have to contain the same configuration (at least, the VLAN must be the same).&amp;nbsp; You have two links coming out of the UCS server - one link goes to switch A and the other to switch B.&amp;nbsp; When Both links are active then the bond will ensure that all traffic flows over to switch A only.&amp;nbsp; As far as I know, when you check the interface on switch B, you'll see the interface is UP/UP, but there will be no MAC address on that interface. That is how it should be.&amp;nbsp; As soon as you break the link to switch A, the bond will cause the traffic to move to switch B - then you will see ISE's MAC address on that switch too.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Don't try building redundancy using two ISE interfaces, with distinct IP addresses. Gig0 is the only true management interface.&amp;nbsp; SSH does not run on gig1.&amp;nbsp; It won't work.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2024 22:51:09 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Arne Bier</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-09-05T22:51:09Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Cisco ISE NIC Bonding</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/cisco-ise-nic-bonding/m-p/3992039#M455258</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Is it necessary to deregister ISE node from deployment if i want to do NIC Bonding ( eth0 and eth1)?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If i must deregister node, is there a consequences in configuration after i register node to deployment again?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have two ISE nodes in deployment, primary and secondary.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2019 13:09:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/cisco-ise-nic-bonding/m-p/3992039#M455258</guid>
      <dc:creator>ibrkic001</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-12-02T13:09:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Cisco ISE NIC Bonding</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/cisco-ise-nic-bonding/m-p/3992443#M455259</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Nope - I tried it just now and it didn't mind that the node I was doing this on, was in fact the Primary (i.e. it was not a Standalone node).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;interface GigabitEthernet 0
  ip address 192.168.0.220 255.255.255.0
  ipv6 address autoconfig
  ipv6 enable
!
interface GigabitEthernet 1
  shutdown
  ipv6 address autoconfig
  ipv6 enable

!
ise02/admin# conf t
Enter configuration commands, one per line.  End with CNTL/Z.
ise02/admin(config)# interface gigabitEthernet 0
ise02/admin(config-GigabitEthernet)# backup interface gigabitEthernet 1

Changing backup interface configuration may cause ise services to restart.
Are you sure you want to proceed? Y/N [N]: Y
Stopping ISE Monitoring &amp;amp; Troubleshooting Log Processor...
PassiveID WMI Service is disabled
...
&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;After a few minutes&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;interface GigabitEthernet 0
  ipv6 address autoconfig
  ipv6 enable
  backup interface GigabitEthernet 1
  ip address 192.168.0.220 255.255.255.0
!
interface GigabitEthernet 1
  ipv6 address autoconfig
&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;And&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;ise02/admin# show interface
bond0: flags=5187&amp;lt;UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MASTER,MULTICAST&amp;gt;  mtu 1500
        inet 192.168.0.220  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 192.168.0.255
        inet6 fe80::250:56ff:fe8a:e427  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20&amp;lt;link&amp;gt;
        ether 00:50:56:8a:e4:27  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 5483  bytes 993844 (970.5 KiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 427  bytes 32476 (31.7 KiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0


GigabitEthernet 0
        flags=6211&amp;lt;UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SLAVE,MULTICAST&amp;gt;  mtu 1500
        ether 00:50:56:8a:e4:27  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 5479  bytes 993604 (970.3 KiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 427  bytes 32476 (31.7 KiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

GigabitEthernet 1
        flags=6211&amp;lt;UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SLAVE,MULTICAST&amp;gt;  mtu 1500
        ether 00:50:56:8a:e4:27  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 4  bytes 240 (240.0 B)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 0  bytes 0 (0.0 B)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
&lt;/PRE&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Dec 2019 00:38:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/cisco-ise-nic-bonding/m-p/3992443#M455259</guid>
      <dc:creator>Arne Bier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-12-03T00:38:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Cisco ISE NIC Bonding</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/cisco-ise-nic-bonding/m-p/3992635#M455260</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank You Arne for quick reply, it works.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Dec 2019 10:32:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/cisco-ise-nic-bonding/m-p/3992635#M455260</guid>
      <dc:creator>ibrkic001</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-12-03T10:32:05Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Cisco ISE NIC Bonding</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/cisco-ise-nic-bonding/m-p/5170984#M591638</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi all,&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;I have a question regarding NIC bonding on ISE.&lt;BR /&gt;Is NIC bonding acting as an active/passive failover? According to NIC bonding on Linux, mode 1 is acting as Active/backup&lt;BR /&gt;If I use NIC bonding, how does the switchport have to look like? Just both as single access ports?&lt;BR /&gt;And what if i don't use NIC bonding and just connect GigabitEthernet Port 0 and 1 to the switch? Will this also trigger a failover although just GigabitEthernet 0 as an assigned IP address?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thank you&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks in advance&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2024 14:33:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/cisco-ise-nic-bonding/m-p/5170984#M591638</guid>
      <dc:creator>mikewinkler</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-09-04T14:33:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Cisco ISE NIC Bonding</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/cisco-ise-nic-bonding/m-p/5172030#M591687</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The switch interface config on both switche have to contain the same configuration (at least, the VLAN must be the same).&amp;nbsp; You have two links coming out of the UCS server - one link goes to switch A and the other to switch B.&amp;nbsp; When Both links are active then the bond will ensure that all traffic flows over to switch A only.&amp;nbsp; As far as I know, when you check the interface on switch B, you'll see the interface is UP/UP, but there will be no MAC address on that interface. That is how it should be.&amp;nbsp; As soon as you break the link to switch A, the bond will cause the traffic to move to switch B - then you will see ISE's MAC address on that switch too.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Don't try building redundancy using two ISE interfaces, with distinct IP addresses. Gig0 is the only true management interface.&amp;nbsp; SSH does not run on gig1.&amp;nbsp; It won't work.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2024 22:51:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/cisco-ise-nic-bonding/m-p/5172030#M591687</guid>
      <dc:creator>Arne Bier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-09-05T22:51:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

