Panorama Is Already In Use

[Jkobe Peoples]

Iadded a PA to panorama test lab with version 9.1.11 them import configuration. However I am unable to push config from panorama to PA and I found below errors which showing customized application is in use, then I need to delete many objects and policies on PA firewall to push configuration. I want to know is it a normal practice for Panorama to manage production PA in the first time? Many thanks!

Or migrate existing Firewall by importing configuration to Panorama and pushing it back to Firewall. Here is corresponding Best Practice: -practices/10-1/best-practices-for-managing-firewalls-with-pan...

In my case when we deployed Panorama we already had several Firewalls deployed in production and despite the fact there was an option to migrate Firewall to Panorama by importing configuration, I opted for onboarding it as a new Firewall then I pushed all the configuration from Device Group and Template Stack and deleted all local configuration as far as I could. What I personally did not like about importing existing configuration were 2 things:

- I wanted to avoid issue you posted here that by importing I need to resolve several issue first. Also, I was afraid of merging of config and forcing of Template Values especially for critical Firewalls.

By pushing new configuration by Panorama with different naming convention than local configuration has avoided any configuration duplication. This approach has still several disadvantages. It is time consuming to clean up all local configuration and unless I select: "Force Template Values" most of the configuration is pushed but not applied unless I override it and commit it locally. At this moment I have under Panorama over 150+ Firewalls and I used the same approach regardless it is brand new device or existing one that I turned into Panorama managed. We have decided not to use Panorama for interface configuration and routing. This is what we manage locally as we would like to have more control and avoid operational mistakes by pushing something centrally that will break control plane.

If you have greenfield deployment I would leverage Panorama as much as you can. Unless you are concerned about some of the points I mentioned I do not discourage you to use import of local configuration to Panorama and pushing it back. I know many admins that use it successfully in their deployments.

@TonyTam is correct. When you initially import a firewall configuration into Panorama, you need to "Export or push device config bundle" to remove the local configuration and replace with Panorama configuration. If you try Commit > Push to Devices you will get the "already in use" or "duplicated name" errors. You only have to do it once, and then you can manage from Panorama normally.

Thank you for the detailed explanations, @PavelK and @TomYoung we ran into plenty of conflicts onboarding firewalls that were already part of our infrastructure. I have found that not moving the firewall from the DG and Template it creates until the config package has been successfully pushed helps minimize conflicts. I also found that sometimes the error output will flag items that are clearly in the configuration in Panorama but are not being recognized by the firewall during the push. No other solution has worked besides re-adding the object locally on the firewall and then committing the config locally as well. After that the commit succeeds and the device can be moved to the preferred DG and template stack. Hope this helps anyone else who runs into this.

In case anyone else runs in to this issue, check your template stack and ensure the device is still added. I just ran into a similar issue as OP and in the end, the device was somehow removed from the template stack and had to be re-added. This may have occured when I "disable panorama policy and objects" or the "disable device and network templates". Haven't seen this happen before.

Ok, I know this has been brought up over the years (after searching the forums) but how can this not have been resolved, especially now with batch rendering???

I have just done a panorama presentation of a house with different states of demolition and with the various options all setup as staging in 3Dvista - there were about 78 panos all together exported from Enscape.

The downloaded file looses all reference to the original view name????? Why? How can this be acceptable 'still'? (or am I missing something?????)

I had to go through all the different views and all the different subtle versions and work out which was which.......

Surely this is such a basic requirement of any program???? and the info is already in there!

I am hoping I am just being stupid and this can already be done, and am more than happy to be made a fool but I dont believe it is

I love Enscape for its quality of render and pano export size, but I am about to embark on a huge project of 100's+ of panos, and this will be a deal breaker when choosing rendering software to be used.

All help appreciated

Non destructive everything: Focus merge (with masked layers and possibility to go back "merge persona"), HDR merge (back to "hdr persona"), Focus Stack (already non destructive), Panorama (with masked layers and back to "panorama persona"), Tone Mapping persona etc.

It seems to me that these are already non-destructive in that the original files are not changed at all. What would be a more appropriate request (which has already been made) is that we could call up one of these stack operations for a set of already loaded files (or indeed already stacked files). This would allow the user to apply their own masks as the OP desires.

If you use the the PS Photomerge tooling the output is a bunch of layers. Each image stays the way it was, but it's layer is automaticly transformed and the relevant part of it to the whole Panorama is visible trough a generated mask. This is where I would see that you can argue that the original input is applied non-destructive. I could imagine that this is meant by a "Panorama Persona" the OP mentioned.

For Panoramas both, PS and Photo, are pretty bad. In my case the result of Photo contains a lot of errors and Photoshop takes an enternity to calculate the Panorama and also has errors. So I won't bother for Panoramas as I would recommend everybody to stick to Microsoft ICE for that matter.

Yes, please. Use layers and masks where appropriate (e.g. focus stacking) and where it's not possible to use layers give us other means of returning to the previous step in order to fix errors and improve the result (e.g. HDR and the panorama tool).

Like most understood - i meant that AP generate new pixel layer - when PS generate new project with multiple layers with masks (and make possible to re-mask these selected areas and layers later - no need to go back panorama persona and develop / generate image from start by jumping from persona to persona this would be handy for small and fast fix/retouch issues - when fast fixes can be made directly in photo persona by selection right layer and mask).

And I agree that AP and PS panorama merge isn't as good as Microsoft's ICE or Kolor's Autopano - but I hope it will be someday.

I really hope everything will be non-destructive - no matter what process - possiblity to go back in tone mapping persona and change everything just like in the first time even better if user can add tone map layers.. well maybe persona layers would be bad idea? But non-destructive: when focus stacked or panorama sticthed image is generated by AP - it should generate layer image (if user select non-destructive workflow/stitching) -> if non-destructive is selected then generated sticthed image should have all images (layers) with masks for later mask processing if somehting need to be fixed or changed for some reason. Focus stacking should generate also final image with sticthed images with masks - those masks could be used to generate depth map (even better if Affinity could generate it automatically - depth map)

But something innovating should be done for these projects where panorama or focus stacking includes thousands of photos - some kind of "smart layer" like group layer (something like smart group in PS but not that complex) - some kind of way to open that one layer with multiple layers and collapse it back when user is ready - and when needed - go back to that layer and expand its hierarchy again - but something more than just expanding and collapsing a hierarchy - what it should be, i don't know. Not yet. i will tell if i get some idea.

3a8082e126