<?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: Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior in Wireless</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240710#M279230</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;You use RMI ?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;if Yes then&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;if PO to SW is shut in active the standby failover to be new active&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;MHM&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2024 14:04:57 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>MHM Cisco World</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-12-25T14:04:57Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240709#M279229</link>
      <description>&lt;DIV class="flex max-w-full flex-col flex-grow"&gt;
&lt;DIV class="min-h-8 text-message flex w-full flex-col items-end gap-2 whitespace-normal break-words text-start [.text-message+&amp;amp;]:mt-5" dir="auto" data-message-author-role="assistant" data-message-id="22a88213-2b9a-43ed-b1c5-e69560ba7711" data-message-model-slug="gpt-4o"&gt;
&lt;DIV class="flex w-full flex-col gap-1 empty:hidden first:pt-[3px]"&gt;
&lt;DIV class="markdown prose w-full break-words dark:prose-invert light"&gt;
&lt;P&gt;In a Cisco&amp;nbsp; Catalyst Controller 9800 SSO deployment, will failover occur if the interface or port-channel of the active WLC is physically shut down?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2024 14:00:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240709#M279229</guid>
      <dc:creator>GHOZLANE Haroun</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-25T14:00:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240710#M279230</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You use RMI ?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;if Yes then&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;if PO to SW is shut in active the standby failover to be new active&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;MHM&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2024 14:04:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240710#M279230</guid>
      <dc:creator>MHM Cisco World</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-25T14:04:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240712#M279231</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;It's not working for me—failover only occurs when the active WLC goes completely down.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Our deployment has the WLCs in VSS Pair mode without any split links or cross cables. Could this configuration affect failover behavior?&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="9800 SSO Design.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/236535iE59E019E2AE41534/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="9800 SSO Design.png" alt="9800 SSO Design.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2024 14:25:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240712#M279231</guid>
      <dc:creator>GHOZLANE Haroun</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-25T14:25:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240713#M279232</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I mention RMI' do you use it?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;MHM&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2024 14:26:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240713#M279232</guid>
      <dc:creator>MHM Cisco World</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-25T14:26:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240715#M279233</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;if you use RMI and it down then your case is third in table&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;MHM&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Screenshot (228).png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/236536i2463EDC9188EC819/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="Screenshot (228).png" alt="Screenshot (228).png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2024 14:29:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240715#M279233</guid>
      <dc:creator>MHM Cisco World</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-25T14:29:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240716#M279234</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;yes it is configured ,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;!&lt;BR /&gt;interface Vlan100&lt;BR /&gt;description Wireless Management&lt;BR /&gt;ip address 10.160.1.5 255.255.255.0 secondary&lt;BR /&gt;ip address 10.160.1.7 255.255.255.0&lt;BR /&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2024 14:49:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240716#M279234</guid>
      <dc:creator>GHOZLANE Haroun</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-25T14:49:14Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240719#M279235</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;i am using layer two porchannel as bellow&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;In my&amp;nbsp; failover test, I shut down the port channel from the switch side. As a result, the access points and clients disconnected and did not switch over to the backup wlc02.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;This behavior suggests that the redundancy mechanisms did not function as expected.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;!&lt;BR /&gt;interface Vlan100&lt;BR /&gt;description Wireless Management&lt;BR /&gt;ip address 10.160.1.5 255.255.255.0 secondary&lt;BR /&gt;ip address 10.160.1.7 255.255.255.0&lt;BR /&gt;!&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;!&lt;BR /&gt;interface Port-channel10&lt;BR /&gt;description ###to-WLC-DCO1###&lt;BR /&gt;switchport trunk allowed vlan 100&lt;BR /&gt;switchport mode trunk&lt;BR /&gt;end&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;DC01-WLC01#sh etherchannel 10 summary&lt;BR /&gt;Flags: D - down P - bundled in port-channel&lt;BR /&gt;I - stand-alone s - suspended&lt;BR /&gt;H - Hot-standby (LACP only)&lt;BR /&gt;R - Layer3 S - Layer2&lt;BR /&gt;U - in use f - failed to allocate aggregator&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;M - not in use, minimum links not met&lt;BR /&gt;u - unsuitable for bundling&lt;BR /&gt;w - waiting to be aggregated&lt;BR /&gt;d - default port&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;A - formed by Auto LAG&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Number of channel-groups in use: 1&lt;BR /&gt;Number of aggregators: 1&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Group Port-channel Protocol Ports&lt;BR /&gt;------+-------------+-----------+-----------------------------------------------&lt;BR /&gt;10 Po10(SU) LACP Te0/1/0(P) Te0/1/1(P)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2024 15:00:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240719#M279235</guid>
      <dc:creator>GHOZLANE Haroun</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-25T15:00:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240720#M279236</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;-&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/635699"&gt;@GHOZLANE Haroun&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;EM&gt;&amp;gt;...In my&amp;nbsp; failover test, I shut down the port channel from the switch side. As a result, the access points and clients disconnected and did not switch over to the backup wlc02.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;- The phrasing and test sequence is incorrect , controller failover targets inner health checks and operations of the controllers and does not include external networking issues. A real controller failover can make APs switchover , which is transparent in HA SSO.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;M.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2024 15:25:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240720#M279236</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mark Elsen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-25T15:25:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240726#M279237</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;As &lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/291804"&gt;@Mark Elsen&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp; mentioned' you need to shut down PO from SW to test .&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Why? If you shutdown the PO from active WLC itself the config is sync to standby abd hence now both WLC have PO down and this is case 4 in table which is dont force failover&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;MHM&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2024 15:49:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240726#M279237</guid>
      <dc:creator>MHM Cisco World</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-25T15:49:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240754#M279243</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/635699"&gt;@GHOZLANE Haroun&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;It should failover as long as the Active WLC is using this port-channel to reach its gateway. And the RD port is communicating through your VSS switch.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2024 23:15:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240754#M279243</guid>
      <dc:creator>Flavio Miranda</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-25T23:15:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240759#M279245</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes and no.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;In theory, yes.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;In reality, it will depend on multiple factors, such as:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P class="lia-indent-padding-left-30px"&gt;1.&amp;nbsp; Are the controllers 9800-L or the bigger units (multiple WNCD);&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P class="lia-indent-padding-left-30px"&gt;2.&amp;nbsp; In multi- or single WNCD, depends on the uptime&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P class="lia-indent-padding-left-30px"&gt;3.&amp;nbsp; In single- or multi-WNCD, depends on the code&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P class="lia-indent-padding-left-30px"&gt;4.&amp;nbsp; In multi-WNCD, depends on the control-plane memory utilization&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P class="lia-indent-padding-left-30px"&gt;5.&amp;nbsp; In multi-WNCD, depends on the AP count, daily wireless users, is the SSID PSK or not, etc&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2024 23:24:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240759#M279245</guid>
      <dc:creator>Leo Laohoo</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-25T23:24:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Catalyst 9800 Failover Behavior</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240792#M279257</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Make sure you refer to the later (17.6) version of the doc you quoted:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/wireless/controller/9800/17-6/deployment-guide/c9800-ha-sso-deployment-guide-rel-17-6.pdf" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/wireless/controller/9800/17-6/deployment-guide/c9800-ha-sso-deployment-guide-rel-17-6.pdf&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;As there were a number of enhancements to SSO between 17.1 and 17.6.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Also see&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/controller/9800/technical-reference/c9800-best-practices.html#StatefulswitchoverSSO" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/controller/9800/technical-reference/c9800-best-practices.html#StatefulswitchoverSSO&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;and&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://www.ciscolive.com/c/dam/r/ciscolive/apjc/docs/2023/pdf/BRKEWN-2846.pdf" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.ciscolive.com/c/dam/r/ciscolive/apjc/docs/2023/pdf/BRKEWN-2846.pdf&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;It's &lt;STRONG&gt;recommended&lt;/STRONG&gt; to have the RP link connected back to back if at all possible and &lt;STRONG&gt;not&lt;/STRONG&gt; through the switch network as it seems you're doing.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;What version of software are you running? (refer to TAC recommended link below)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Dec 2024 01:54:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/catalyst-9800-failover-behavior/m-p/5240792#M279257</guid>
      <dc:creator>Rich R</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-12-26T01:54:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

