<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Difference in Session Synchronization configuration output in PAN-OS 11.2 Active/Passive HA in Next-Generation Firewall Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/difference-in-session-synchronization-configuration-output-in/m-p/1253080#M6877</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello experts,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would like to confirm the HA configuration behavior in PAN-OS 11.2.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have two firewalls configured in an Active/Passive HA pair. In the GUI, Enable Session Synchronization is enabled on both devices.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;However, when checking the configuration from the CLI, the following line is displayed on one device:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;”set deviceconfig high-availability group state-synchronization enabled yes”&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;On the other device, the same configuration line is not displayed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In this case, is it correct to understand that enabled yes is the default value, and therefore it may not be exported to the XML / set-format configuration unless it was explicitly configured?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In other words, could this difference simply mean that one device has yes explicitly saved due to a past operation, while the other device is using the default value?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If both devices show Session Synchronization as enabled in the GUI and CLI, can this XML / set-format difference be safely ignored?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would like to confirm whether this should be treated as an actual configuration difference, or simply as a display difference caused by explicit vs. implicit default values.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If anyone is familiar with the PAN-OS 11.2 behavior or has observed a similar case, I would appreciate your advice.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 10:05:46 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>cpcpcptest176</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2026-04-27T10:05:46Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Difference in Session Synchronization configuration output in PAN-OS 11.2 Active/Passive HA</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/difference-in-session-synchronization-configuration-output-in/m-p/1253080#M6877</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello experts,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would like to confirm the HA configuration behavior in PAN-OS 11.2.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We have two firewalls configured in an Active/Passive HA pair. In the GUI, Enable Session Synchronization is enabled on both devices.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;However, when checking the configuration from the CLI, the following line is displayed on one device:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;”set deviceconfig high-availability group state-synchronization enabled yes”&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;On the other device, the same configuration line is not displayed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In this case, is it correct to understand that enabled yes is the default value, and therefore it may not be exported to the XML / set-format configuration unless it was explicitly configured?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In other words, could this difference simply mean that one device has yes explicitly saved due to a past operation, while the other device is using the default value?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If both devices show Session Synchronization as enabled in the GUI and CLI, can this XML / set-format difference be safely ignored?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would like to confirm whether this should be treated as an actual configuration difference, or simply as a display difference caused by explicit vs. implicit default values.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If anyone is familiar with the PAN-OS 11.2 behavior or has observed a similar case, I would appreciate your advice.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 10:05:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/difference-in-session-synchronization-configuration-output-in/m-p/1253080#M6877</guid>
      <dc:creator>cpcpcptest176</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-04-27T10:05:46Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Difference in Session Synchronization configuration output in PAN-OS 11.2 Active/Passive HA</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/difference-in-session-synchronization-configuration-output-in/m-p/1253218#M6881</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Just checked my recently set up HA pair.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;11.2.10-h5&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Both firewalls show following output (so only keep-alive checkbox setting).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;show | match state-synchronization&lt;BR /&gt;set deviceconfig high-availability group state-synchronization ha2-keep-alive enabled yes&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 12:45:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/difference-in-session-synchronization-configuration-output-in/m-p/1253218#M6881</guid>
      <dc:creator>Raido_Rattameister</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-04-28T12:45:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

