https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/user-id-validation-after-upgrade/m-p/599091#M3820 <P>Hi All,&nbsp;</P> <P>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</P> <DIV class="flex-shrink-0 flex flex-col relative items-end"> <DIV> <DIV class="pt-0"> <DIV class="gizmo-bot-avatar flex h-8 w-8 items-center justify-center overflow-hidden rounded-full"> <DIV class="relative p-1 rounded-sm flex items-center justify-center bg-token-main-surface-primary text-token-text-primary h-8 w-8">&nbsp;</DIV> </DIV> </DIV> </DIV> </DIV> <DIV class="group/conversation-turn relative flex w-full min-w-0 flex-col agent-turn"> <DIV class="flex-col gap-1 md:gap-3"> <DIV class="flex max-w-full flex-col flex-grow"> <DIV class="min-h-8 text-message flex w-full flex-col items-end gap-2 whitespace-normal break-words [.text-message+&amp;]:mt-5" dir="auto" data-message-author-role="assistant" data-message-id="a4d5e48f-39f0-4d6b-8e4b-5f47118d190b"> <DIV class="flex w-full flex-col gap-1 empty:hidden first:pt-[3px]"> <DIV class="markdown prose w-full break-words dark:prose-invert light"> <P>We are in the process of upgrading our User-ID agent to a new version. Currently, all User-ID agents are connected to their respective servers and are actively providing user mapping information to the firewalls. Since the upgrade requires a reboot of the agent, I plan to perform the upgrade on a site-by-site basis. Given that all User-ID agents are capable of supplying user mapping information, what would be the most effective method to validate that the user mapping data is accurately reaching the firewalls after each agent upgrade?</P> <P><LI-PRODUCT title="User-ID" id="User-ID"></LI-PRODUCT>&nbsp;</P> </DIV> </DIV> </DIV> </DIV> </DIV> </DIV> Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:57:34 GMT Ironsecurity 2024-09-30T13:57:34Z https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/user-id-validation-after-upgrade/m-p/599091#M3820 <P>Hi All,&nbsp;</P> <P>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</P> <DIV class="flex-shrink-0 flex flex-col relative items-end"> <DIV> <DIV class="pt-0"> <DIV class="gizmo-bot-avatar flex h-8 w-8 items-center justify-center overflow-hidden rounded-full"> <DIV class="relative p-1 rounded-sm flex items-center justify-center bg-token-main-surface-primary text-token-text-primary h-8 w-8">&nbsp;</DIV> </DIV> </DIV> </DIV> </DIV> <DIV class="group/conversation-turn relative flex w-full min-w-0 flex-col agent-turn"> <DIV class="flex-col gap-1 md:gap-3"> <DIV class="flex max-w-full flex-col flex-grow"> <DIV class="min-h-8 text-message flex w-full flex-col items-end gap-2 whitespace-normal break-words [.text-message+&amp;]:mt-5" dir="auto" data-message-author-role="assistant" data-message-id="a4d5e48f-39f0-4d6b-8e4b-5f47118d190b"> <DIV class="flex w-full flex-col gap-1 empty:hidden first:pt-[3px]"> <DIV class="markdown prose w-full break-words dark:prose-invert light"> <P>We are in the process of upgrading our User-ID agent to a new version. Currently, all User-ID agents are connected to their respective servers and are actively providing user mapping information to the firewalls. Since the upgrade requires a reboot of the agent, I plan to perform the upgrade on a site-by-site basis. Given that all User-ID agents are capable of supplying user mapping information, what would be the most effective method to validate that the user mapping data is accurately reaching the firewalls after each agent upgrade?</P> <P><LI-PRODUCT title="User-ID" id="User-ID"></LI-PRODUCT>&nbsp;</P> </DIV> </DIV> </DIV> </DIV> </DIV> </DIV> Mon, 30 Sep 2024 13:57:34 GMT https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/user-id-validation-after-upgrade/m-p/599091#M3820 Ironsecurity 2024-09-30T13:57:34Z