We're trying to figure out which mode (bridge or routed) we should configure a pair of ACE SM's on the core and I have a quick question in conjunction with a bridge mode.
In a load-balance request, a packet will arrive at the VIP, and the ACE will pick the appropriate server and then use the destination Network Address Translation (NAT) to send the client request to the server. The server will respond using the interface VLAN of the MSFC as its default gateway to the client. At this juncture, the ACE will change the source IP back to the VIP and bridge the traffic to the MSFC. How would the flow be different if a request were not for load-balancing, but just for a specific server. Would the ACE still do the destination NAT and then change the source back to the VIP on the returned packet? - how does ACE differentiate between a load balanced vs a non load balance request, since they both come in on the same VIP vlan?
Traffic to specific rservers is just routed/bridged (though a 2-leg connection is maintained in ACE connection table). No NAT. Traffic to VIP is implicitly NAT'ed as you write. This type of traffic is recognized by L3/L4 class-maps (match virtual-address). Decision is based on destination IP address and port.
VMware Trunk Port Group is supported from ACI version 2.1
VMM integration must be configured properly
ASA device package must be uploaded to APIC
ASAv version must be compatible with ACI and device package version
In the Previous articles of ACI Automation, we are using Postman/Newman as the Rest API tool to automate the ACI Configuration.
In this article I’m going to discuss on usin...
One of the first steps in building your ACI Fabric is to go through Fabric Discovery. While Fabric Discovery is usually a straightforward process, there are various issues that may prevent you from discovering an ACI switch. This article wil...