Suppose LMS 3.x is left alone for N days after getting fully configured, during which time User Tracking Major Acquisition runs once a day, would the Switch Port Report then have data about what ports have been up/down for >N days, or does that feature rely on LMS 3.x User Tracking being in action for the entire desired reporting period? Would the CM UT data migrated from LMS 2.6 help at all in this regard?
UT would have data on those ports for up to N days provided the port transitioned between up and down within those N days, and that change was picked up my User Tracking. The migrated data from 2.6 can be used for this report.
I'm still not clear on this: If no ports change state in the N days since LMS 3.x becomes operational, can 3.x report on ports that had gone up/down >N days ago, based on LMS 2.6 UT data imported during the upgrade?
The data inserted from LMS 2.6 will serve as a baseline for when a user was last on the port. From there, the reclaim switch port reports can be used to find idle ports. Of course, since the LMS 2.6 upgrade, the port would need to have transitioned to a down state for these reports to consider it available for reclamation.
Hi everyone, I would like to thank you in advance for any help you can provide a newcomer like myself!
Im studying the 100-105 book by Odom and am currently on the topic of Port security. I purchased a used 2960 and I'm trying to follow a...
While deploying a number of 18xx/2802/3802 model access points (APs), which run AP-COS as their operating platform. It can be observed on some occasions that while many of their access points were able to join the fabric WLC withou...
I am going to design and build an LAN network under a tunnel underground with long distance between the switches.
I will have 2 Catalyst switches and 8 Industrial IE3000, and they will be connected with fiber.
For now I am planning on use Layer-2 s...