topic Re: IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x in Network Access Control

IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x

Garry Cross — Thu, 29 Nov 2018 21:09:27 GMT

I am having trouble making something work.

I want to apply a service-template only if mab and dot1x both fail.

I am trying to use concurrent authentication.

I used a class that is listed as an example in the

Cisco IOS Identity-Based Networking Services Command Reference

This example is listed under the command match result-type

class-map type subscriber control match-all ALL-FAILED
 no-match result-type method dot1x none
 no-match result-type method dot1x success
 no-match result-type method mab none
 no-match result-type method mab success
 no-match result-type method webauth none
 no-match result-type method webauth success

Here is a debug after mab fails and followed by dot1x failed.

Nov 29 15:49:19: %DOT1X-5-FAIL: Authentication failed for client (001b.78f6.0aed) on Interface Gi1/0/1 AuditSessionID 0A3D011E0000006886626E6C
Nov 29 15:49:19: [PRE:RULE:EVENT:2F000038] Executing policy-map type control subscriber User_Test
Nov 29 15:49:19: [PRE:RULE:EVENT:2F000038]   event (id:1 name:authentication-failure) match-first
Nov 29 15:49:19: [PRE:RULE:EVENT:2F000038]     class ALL-FAILED do-until-failure policy instance 0x990200E4
Nov 29 15:49:19: [PRE:RULE:EVENT:2F000038] Evaluate: class-map type control match-all subscriber ALL-FAILED
Nov 29 15:49:19: [PRE:RULE:EVENT:2F000038]   no-match result-type method dot1x none :failure

I expect that the method would be dot1x and the result type would be authoritative. So why do I not get a success on the no-match

Hope somebody can shed some light on this.

Re: IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x

hslai — Sun, 16 Dec 2018 04:36:07 GMT

Please start with ISE Secure Wired Access Prescriptive Deployment Guide

match-all means all needing to be matched, I believe.

Re: IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x

Garry Cross — Mon, 17 Dec 2018 04:54:11 GMT

That is correct. The debug should evaluate each statement in the class.

no-match ... none should result in success. no-match ... success should also be success. For both mab and dot1x. I don't have web-auth in my actual class map. So ALL-FAILED needs to match for my policy to work.

Re: IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x

hslai — Mon, 17 Dec 2018 13:38:51 GMT

I am no expert on IBNS 2.0 but using negative against negative would be problematic and leads to un-expected results. Please use the guide I pointed out and see how things work.

Re: IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x

Garry Cross — Mon, 17 Dec 2018 13:50:31 GMT

How is match-all against four no-match statements a double negative.

The example is listed in the command reference. I will review the guide again. Am currently on a mobile, so that will have to be later.

Re: IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x

hslai — Mon, 17 Dec 2018 16:14:49 GMT

no-match result-type method dot1x none

Somehow it failed for this so it does not continue. I have no idea what it means exactly but

none—No result.

I guest no-match a no-result is negative against negative. hehe.

ISE Secure Wired Access Prescriptive Deployment Guide gives working examples. If any specific not working, please let mnagired know as he took it over from hariholla as the owner of this guide.

Re: IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x

Garry Cross — Mon, 17 Dec 2018 22:04:58 GMT

I looked through the guide, there isn't any reference to concurrent authentication nor to match/no-match result-type none.

One need to ensure that both mab and dot1x have completed. In other words the result-type is not success and not none.

I expect that if the result type is none, then the method is either never been started, is running, or has been terminated. There might be a result-type other than none after being terminated, but should be reset back to none if started again.

I believe this to be a bug. I have a case open with no feedback as of yet.

Regards.

Re: IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x

hslai — Mon, 17 Dec 2018 23:06:00 GMT

Please do not use concurrent DOT1X and MAB with ISE. At present, ISE is expecting the endpoint session either in DOT1X or in MAB at one time or another but not at the same time.

Re: IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x

Garry Cross — Tue, 18 Dec 2018 00:50:13 GMT

Well its documented in these two links. The session number for MAB and dot1x are different. Are you telling me and my customer that you can't do this even though you document it. More fuel to the fire in my customers bad experiences so far.
IBNS 2.0 Deployment Guide - Cisco
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/ios-nx-os-software/identity-based-networking-services/whitepaper_C11-729965.html#_Toc404649482
Configuring Identity Control Policies
https://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios-xml/ios/san/configuration/xe-3se/3850/san-cntrl-pol.html#GUID-5D90F0D3-E498-4DE9-8153-C46695F8B7C2

Re: IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x

hslai — Tue, 18 Dec 2018 16:41:49 GMT

Unfortunately that is where we stand for now. See CSCuy05270

It would work if DOT1X and MAB requests are sent to two distinct ISE deployments.

Re: IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x

bern81 — Tue, 19 Mar 2019 09:20:52 GMT

Hi Hslai,

Sorry to comment on this discussion since it is already marked as solved.

But isn't one of the buzzing marketing for using IBNS v2.0 is because of the concurrent Flexauth that it reduces time for endpoint to join the network compared to sequential Flexauth?

To be honest i find this IBNS v2.0 complex and not offering so much advantage over the IBNS v1.0 which is more clear.

Re: IBNS 2.0 no-match result-type method dot1x

paul — Tue, 19 Mar 2019 11:40:12 GMT

Hsing,

The bug you posted was referencing failed MAB attempts. As I have posted in other posts we never have a failed MAB condition in our setups. We probably have 500k+ switch ports across our customers running simultaneous MAB/Dot1x with IBNS 2.0. Has the BU done any research to isolate the cause for that bug to see if the issue is really around the MAB failures?

In our setups MAB is successful in all cases immediately then Dot1x follows in a few second later. The switch properly implements the priority for Dot1x and moves the client to Dot1x. Works perfectly.