I have a working WAAS setup between remote site the central / core site. Its accelerating well as configured except for servers on the Central site that use HSRP and send the reply traffic towards their default gateway (Gateway2) while the request would have arrived via the other HSRP gateway (Gateway1). The WAE device is hanging off Gateway1 and uses WCCP. Here is how it draws out.
Can anyone please tell if this is expected. Simply, if a WCCP router sends traffic out on the LAN side using one interface but received it from the LAN through another interface, Is it considered asymetric from the perspective of WAAS device which directly and only connects to the WCCP router ?
Please note that VLAN1 is defined on both the routers. The "Server" has default gateway set to the HSRP address that is active on Router2. Return traffic from server has to hit Router2 first and then routed to WCCP-Router which will forward it to the WAAS using wccp.
Not Really, All waas want to see is a complete TCP flow. So if SYN go via VLAN2 and SYN-ACK came back via VLAN1, and for example WAN interface has both 61/62 redirect applied as IN/OUT. then WAAS will indeed see complete TCP handshake.
The most common issue could be here as how server would behave since this is not an optimal design / recommendation.
I was expecting the same that the complet SYN and SYN+ACK flow through the WAAS box would make it happy with the connection. Another server which has HSRP gateway set to WCCP-Router itsself has got no issues accelerating traffic.
WAAS-------WCCP-Router <----------------- VLAN1
The server in question would see the Source MAC in the request packet from WCCP-Router but it will send the reply packet towards Router2's MAC address as the destination, as it is its default gateway.
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...