topic Re: Cloning Group with MVC Cluster in Firewall and Security Management

Cloning Group with MVC Cluster

alexander1401 — Thu, 31 Mar 2022 14:53:43 GMT

Hello all,

I have the following question.

Due to an error when upgrading to R81 (Case at TAC is open), we are currently in Multi Version Cluster Mode with our cluster on R80.30 and R81.
We had set up the cloning group function in our cluster.

Now my question is: Will it still work even though we have different versions? So can I continue to set my routes etc. via the Group Mode or is this only possible in Single Mode?

Has anyone had any experience with this? I cannot find anything about that in the User Center or somewhere.

Thanks a lot

Re: Cloning Group with MVC Cluster

Chris_Atkinson — Thu, 31 Mar 2022 23:57:21 GMT

Unfortunately this is a known limitation and unsupported please refer PMTR-48258 in sk166717.

Re: Cloning Group with MVC Cluster

Mika — Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:37:50 GMT

Hi Chris,

I can see this limitation is still there in R82.

Using cloning groups is useful, do you know if we can set this feature on, and disable it only when upgrading, where we really need MVC ?

Also, does PMTR-48258 always apply ? or is there some piece of configuration *only* that cannot be shared with cloning-groups (example: if I want only "DNS" settings to be replicated, could it work) ?

Thanks

Michael

CCSM R81

Re: Cloning Group with MVC Cluster

Mika — Tue, 21 Jan 2025 12:41:07 GMT

auto-answer:

I contacted TAC and in short:

It is not possible to implement any part of cloning-group shared features alongside MVC
Enabling both MVC and cloning groups simultaneously may lead to various issues, and the result is unexpected
Disabling the cloning group when planning an upgrade (to use MVC) is not a valid workaround. As per sk182829 - One cluster member is stuck in "Ready" state after the other cluster member is upgraded from R81.20 to R81.20 with JHF Take 14 or higher, this is a known limitation. if MVC is enabled, the cloning-group feature must be disabled.
Currently, resolving this limitation requires a Request for Enhancement (RFE). There is no estimated timeframe for when this issue might be addressed