Enhanced Security Measures in Place:   To ensure a safer experience, we’ve implemented additional, temporary security measures for all users.

Updates to firewalls from Panorama show failed, but seem to install properly

cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements

Updates to firewalls from Panorama show failed, but seem to install properly

L0 Member

When I try to push updates to our firewalls from Panorama, it reports that the job failed, but the jobs seem to complete anyway.  This happens when pushing dynamic updates, and I had it happen again to a software upgrade on a PA-200 last night.  When I installed the most recent Apps & Threat update, it showed failure on over 90% of our firewalls, but all of them seemed to succeed.  I've even observed an HA pair where one unit shows failed and the other didn't, but both received the update.

 

The process appears to complete the upload, and continue the installation, even though Panorama is reporting the job as failed.

 

Has anyone else run across this problem or anything similar?

 

Thanks.

1 REPLY 1

L0 Member

I do not have Panorama; but do I manage a PA-200 and a PA-500, both of which get their updates directly from Palo Alto's servers.

 

The PA-200 routinely produces the above described symptom: when I do a manual Applications and Threats update (for example, in response to an 'Emergency Palo Alto Networks Content Updated' email). I receive a 'Content update job failed...' email, but I cannot see any sign of the update having done anything other than succeeded (either in the web interface or in the CLI).

 

This has never happened on the PA-500.

 

The PA-200 is running PAN-OS version 7 and the PA-500 is running version 6.

 

Also possibly related: the PA-200 also sends emails from time to time, with subject 'SYSTEM ALERT : critical : Disk usage for / exceeds limit, 95 percent in use, cleaning filesystem'.  I don't know whether I am meant to make any manual intervention in response: I have not done anything to date, and the issue seems to take care of itself. If PAN-OS does do the necessary, then the 'critical' designation would seem to be unnecessarily alarmist?

  • 1711 Views
  • 1 replies
  • 0 Likes
Like what you see?

Show your appreciation!

Click Like if a post is helpful to you or if you just want to show your support.

Click Accept as Solution to acknowledge that the answer to your question has been provided.

The button appears next to the replies on topics you’ve started. The member who gave the solution and all future visitors to this topic will appreciate it!

These simple actions take just seconds of your time, but go a long way in showing appreciation for community members and the LIVEcommunity as a whole!

The LIVEcommunity thanks you for your participation!