<?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 Yes, it is called EAP in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-mar-cache-2-node-deployment/m-p/2632808#M74305</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes, it is called EAP-Chaining, and all the shortcomings of MAR are resolved by this.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2015 00:07:12 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>jan.nielsen</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-02-25T00:07:12Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ISE MAR cache 2-node deployment</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-mar-cache-2-node-deployment/m-p/2632807#M74302</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I understand the Pros and Cons described in this document:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/lan-switching/8021x/116516-problemsolution-technology-00.html" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/lan-switching/8021x/116516-problemsolution-technology-00.html&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;And I'm OK with getting people to reboot their machine while connected wirelessly to trigger host authentications on Windows machines.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;My issue is related to the 2-node ISE deployment (I'm running 1.2):&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It appears that MAR cache is not synchronized between the ISE nodes (Primary and Secondary).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For example, a user reboots his machine, and host authentication is answered by the Primary ISE, and user authentication is subsequently succeeds.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Subsequent user authentication requests, if they are answered by the Secondary ISE will fail, because Secondary ISE node does not have a corresponding host record in its MAR cache - only Primary ISE does.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can someone confirm if this behavior is expected?&amp;nbsp; If I can't get the Secondary ISE node to mirror MAR host entries, I'm going to have a LOT of failures, and a lot of user problems?&amp;nbsp; Is there even a workaround for this?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 05:29:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-mar-cache-2-node-deployment/m-p/2632807#M74302</guid>
      <dc:creator>lsigalov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T05:29:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Yes, it is called EAP</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-mar-cache-2-node-deployment/m-p/2632808#M74305</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes, it is called EAP-Chaining, and all the shortcomings of MAR are resolved by this.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2015 00:07:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-mar-cache-2-node-deployment/m-p/2632808#M74305</guid>
      <dc:creator>jan.nielsen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-02-25T00:07:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

