<?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: ISE Device Administration Service in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-device-administration-service/m-p/3491342#M527699</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ahh the fact that you are doing OOB management is an important piece of information not in the original post.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So assuming your ISE nodes are in the normal production network as you said you have two options:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1) You can take a 2nd interface off your ISE nodes and put them into the OOB network.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2) Allow traffic from the OOB to the normal production network for TACACS purposes only.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If there is already some mechanism in place to leak traffic from the OOB network to the production network then I would probably go #2, but if not #1 would work fine as well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2017 12:16:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>paul</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2017-08-14T12:16:06Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ISE Device Administration Service</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-device-administration-service/m-p/3491338#M527695</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 10pt;"&gt;Hello team,&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 10pt;"&gt;On CISCo ISE: &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 10pt;"&gt;Is it a best practice to use the interface Giga eth0 (dedicated to management) as a port for Device Administration Service &lt;SPAN style="color: #3d3d3d; font-family: arial; background-color: #f0f9fe;"&gt;to manage administrative access for Cisco IOS based network devices (AAA, TACACS or RADIUS)?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #3d3d3d; font-size: 10pt; background-color: #f0f9fe; font-family: arial;"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #3d3d3d; font-size: 10pt; background-color: #f0f9fe; font-family: arial;"&gt;I have &lt;SPAN style="color: #3d3d3d; font-family: arial; font-size: 13.3333px;"&gt;Cisco ISE HA in Small Deployment Network (with two node of ISE)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #3d3d3d; font-family: arial; font-size: 10pt; background-color: #f0f9fe;"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #3d3d3d; font-family: arial; font-size: 10pt; background-color: #f0f9fe;"&gt;Best regards&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #3d3d3d; font-size: 10pt; background-color: #f0f9fe; font-family: arial;"&gt;Jordi&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 2017 08:28:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-device-administration-service/m-p/3491338#M527695</guid>
      <dc:creator>jordi.cano</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-08-11T08:28:14Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Device Administration Service</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-device-administration-service/m-p/3491339#M527696</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am moving your post to the Security ISE community for better visibility and access to information.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.cisco.com/space/5301"&gt;Identity Services Engine (ISE)&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you for participating in the community.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Kelli Glass&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Moderator for Cisco Customer Communities&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 2017 20:23:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-device-administration-service/m-p/3491339#M527696</guid>
      <dc:creator>keglass</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-08-11T20:23:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Device Administration Service</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-device-administration-service/m-p/3491340#M527697</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I use a single interface on all my ISE nodes except in the case where I need a Guest portal running in a DMZ.&amp;nbsp; Keep things simple and use a single interface.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 2017 21:13:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-device-administration-service/m-p/3491340#M527697</guid>
      <dc:creator>paul</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-08-11T21:13:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Device Administration Service</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-device-administration-service/m-p/3491341#M527698</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I totally agree to seek simplicity, that is the reason for my question.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Keep in mind that the AAA traffic is located in an Out-of-band network of an extensive network.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The two options I have are:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1- AAA traffic of any equipment to the ISE Management Port (same network)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2- AAA TRAFFIC of any equipment to the service port of the ISE (NAT or a New VRFfor example).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Which of the two options is most appropriate?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Best regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2017 11:31:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-device-administration-service/m-p/3491341#M527698</guid>
      <dc:creator>jordi.cano</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-08-14T11:31:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE Device Administration Service</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-device-administration-service/m-p/3491342#M527699</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ahh the fact that you are doing OOB management is an important piece of information not in the original post.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So assuming your ISE nodes are in the normal production network as you said you have two options:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1) You can take a 2nd interface off your ISE nodes and put them into the OOB network.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2) Allow traffic from the OOB to the normal production network for TACACS purposes only.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If there is already some mechanism in place to leak traffic from the OOB network to the production network then I would probably go #2, but if not #1 would work fine as well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2017 12:16:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-device-administration-service/m-p/3491342#M527699</guid>
      <dc:creator>paul</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-08-14T12:16:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

