<?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 Re: combining radius with tacacs+ with secure acs in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/combining-radius-with-tacacs-with-secure-acs/m-p/601650#M427374</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks. Someone recommended having 2 servers (one for tacacs+ and one for radius) but because of the huge cost with secureacs that isn't feasible for us. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 12:41:15 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>jackleung</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2006-04-25T12:41:15Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>combining radius with tacacs+ with secure acs</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/combining-radius-with-tacacs-with-secure-acs/m-p/601648#M427372</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm looking forward to implementing dot1x with secure acs but I also want to keep tacacs+ for command authorization (basically I also want to restrict what commands users can access). Can this be done?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 10 Mar 2019 21:33:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/combining-radius-with-tacacs-with-secure-acs/m-p/601648#M427372</guid>
      <dc:creator>jackleung</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-10T21:33:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: combining radius with tacacs+ with secure acs</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/combining-radius-with-tacacs-with-secure-acs/m-p/601649#M427373</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I belive it can be setup so that you can specify which group is being used for AAA. I'd have to look into to to be sure.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Patrick&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 01:48:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/combining-radius-with-tacacs-with-secure-acs/m-p/601649#M427373</guid>
      <dc:creator>Patrick Laidlaw</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-04-25T01:48:05Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: combining radius with tacacs+ with secure acs</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/combining-radius-with-tacacs-with-secure-acs/m-p/601650#M427374</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks. Someone recommended having 2 servers (one for tacacs+ and one for radius) but because of the huge cost with secureacs that isn't feasible for us. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 12:41:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/combining-radius-with-tacacs-with-secure-acs/m-p/601650#M427374</guid>
      <dc:creator>jackleung</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-04-25T12:41:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

