<?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 Monitor Mode activation - odd behaviour in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/monitor-mode-activation-odd-behaviour/m-p/2220699#M112319</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt; Hi all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have had a think about this overnight and the best answer I can come up with is that the final line in my code ‘spanning-tree portfast’ is the only one that could possibly have had any impact on a port status. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I tried an experiment whereby I removed the code I added yesterday from one of the ports on the affected switch and then re-added the code (including the portfast line) but could not replicate the problem. If I had been able to replicate it then I could have checked the switchport status to see if it had been error-disabled etc. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:32:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Inayat Bunglawala</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2013-06-16T09:32:37Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Monitor Mode activation - odd behaviour</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/monitor-mode-activation-odd-behaviour/m-p/2220698#M112288</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi everyone,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I came across something very odd today. I have been for a few months now involved in a NAC rollout project and one of today's tasks was to turn on Monitor Mode at one of our sites. I have done this without any problems at a number of other sites already. Yet today, when adding the exact same config as I have done at other sites, I noticed that a portion of our switchports which had previously been in an 'up' and 'up' state were now in a 'down' and 'down' state. To recover, I had to manually bounce those affected ports via the 'shut' and 'no shut' commands. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is the config I added to the switchports:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;authentication order dot1x mab&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;authentication priority dot1x mab&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;authentication port-control auto&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;authentication open&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;authentication host-mode multi-auth&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;authentication event fail action next-method&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;authentication violation restrict&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;mab&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;dot1x pae authenticator&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;dot1x max-reauth-req 1&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;dot1x timeout tx-period 5&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;ip access-group ACL-ALLOW in&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;spanning-tree portfast&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt; &lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Many of the affected ports had Cisco IP Phones connected to them. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Here is the output of the 'sh power inline' command both before and after adding my Monitor Mode config to the switchports - look at the discrepancy in the power drawn by the 3rd switch in the stack:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;[Before adding Monitor Mode config]&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;#sh power inline&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;Module&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Available&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Used&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Remaining&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; (Watts)&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; (Watts)&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; (Watts)&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;------&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; ---------&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; --------&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; ---------&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;1&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 370.0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 241.2&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 128.8&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;2&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 370.0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 205.0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 165.0&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;3&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 370.0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 191.8&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 178.2&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;4&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 370.0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 12.6&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 357.4&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt; &lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;[After adding Monitor Mode config]&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;#sh power inline&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;Module&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Available&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Used&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Remaining&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; (Watts)&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; (Watts)&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; (Watts)&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;------&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; ---------&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; --------&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; ---------&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;1&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 370.0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 241.2&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 128.8&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;2&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 370.0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 205.0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 165.0&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;3&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 370.0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 54.4&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 315.6&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;EM&gt;4&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 370.0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 12.6&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 357.4&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt; &lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As I have said, once I bounced the ports, they recovered and the IP Phones regained network connectivity - but I am very puzzled by this behaviour. Especially as the addition of Monitor Mode configuration on the switchports is meant to be entirely transparent and not negatively affect network connectivity in any way. Has anyone else come across this issue or have a possible explanation for this very strange behaviour?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you in advance.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt; &lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2019 00:30:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/monitor-mode-activation-odd-behaviour/m-p/2220698#M112288</guid>
      <dc:creator>Inayat Bunglawala</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-26T00:30:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Monitor Mode activation - odd behaviour</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/monitor-mode-activation-odd-behaviour/m-p/2220699#M112319</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt; Hi all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have had a think about this overnight and the best answer I can come up with is that the final line in my code ‘spanning-tree portfast’ is the only one that could possibly have had any impact on a port status. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I tried an experiment whereby I removed the code I added yesterday from one of the ports on the affected switch and then re-added the code (including the portfast line) but could not replicate the problem. If I had been able to replicate it then I could have checked the switchport status to see if it had been error-disabled etc. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 16 Jun 2013 09:32:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/monitor-mode-activation-odd-behaviour/m-p/2220699#M112319</guid>
      <dc:creator>Inayat Bunglawala</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-06-16T09:32:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

