I am trying to understand the differences and similarities of persistence, flows and sticky. The documentation on this subject is not very helpful. Can someone out there provide a simple explanation of these three very important concepts?
Persistence: This setting determines whether or not the CSS will allow persistent HTTP connections. i.e. will a browser be allowed to maintain a single TCP connection for multiple requests, or will it be required to open an individual TCP connection for each bit of content. In web-server speak, this is sometimes referred to as "keepalive"
Flows: A flow is CSS speak for a TCP connection. Once a flow is established, an FTP connection for example, the CSS will maintain that flow for the duration of the connection. The CSS will not loadbalance traffic "mid-flow" except under unique circumstances, when a service goes down and remap is configured for example.
Sticky: The various sticky configurations come in to play when you want to have all connections from a particular client go to a particular service. This is most often accomplished with cookies, or sticky tables which track a clients' IP addresses. There is a limit to the size of the IP address table, so cookies scale better for web content.
In HTTP 1.1 there are multiple gets per HTTP-Session so if you use persistency all requests in the HTTP-Session will hit the same server. This denies the possibility to offload content (e.g. JPGs) to a cache. If you do not use persistency you split the HTTP1.1 session in multiple HTTP-Sessions on the CSS.
This document will provide screenshots to outline the steps to setup
TACACS+ configuration to ACI and also the configuration required on
Cisco ACS server. Please find the official Cisco guide for configuring
TACACS+ Authentication to ACI:
Is it supported or NOT supported? It's a frequently asked question.
Before APIC, release 2.3(1f), transit routing was not supported within a
single L3Out profile. In APIC, release 2.3(1f) and later, you can
configure transit routing with a single L3Out pr...
Cisco Documents are usually accurate, but when it came to the document
on Cisco APIC Signature-Based Transactions it was slightly off the mark.
This document is for those novices to API like me who cant seem to
figure out how to go about performing signat...