<?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 TACACS for PEAP in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-tacacs-for-peap/m-p/3469468#M528160</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Arne is correct. The T+ in ISE supports the same set of protocols and proxy as ACS 5.x. PEAP is not a protocol for T+.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Why not evaluating ISE in a lab and test out all use cases?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2017 04:25:30 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>hslai</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2017-07-28T04:25:30Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ISE TACACS for PEAP</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-tacacs-for-peap/m-p/3469466#M528158</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Customer is going from ACS to ISE for TACACS and asked the following:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;"&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; font-family: -webkit-standard; font-size: medium;"&gt;Just to be clear we use the tacacs for peap for our green wireless authentication.&amp;nbsp; Will this change anything ?"&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; font-family: -webkit-standard; font-size: medium;"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; font-family: -webkit-standard; font-size: medium;"&gt;any help much appreciated!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2017 19:39:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-tacacs-for-peap/m-p/3469466#M528158</guid>
      <dc:creator>DanWeaver</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-07-27T19:39:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE TACACS for PEAP</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-tacacs-for-peap/m-p/3469467#M528159</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;The abstruse wording reminds me of something you'd see in a CCIE written exam ... it's outright confusing but somewhere in there is some meaning &lt;IMG src="https://community.cisco.com/legacyfs/online/emoticons/laugh.png" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You don't often see PEAP and TACACS in the same sentence.&amp;nbsp; I have not see a NAS vendor that supports TACACS as the protocol to transport the EAP messages to the authenticating server, if this is what the customer is referring to.&amp;nbsp; Otherwise please ask them to clarify what they mean.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What is green wireless authentication?&amp;nbsp; Some details might be useful here.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bottom line is that ISE is perfectly capable of handling most EAP methods (like PEAP) .&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Perhaps your customer is referring to the fact that the user credentials reside in a TACACS server somewhere and that the AAA needs to proxy the request to an external TACACS?&amp;nbsp; I have not tried it myself, but ISE &lt;EM&gt;can&lt;/EM&gt; proxy TACACS requests - however it's not clear to me whether you can use an External TACACS server in a Radius authentication Policy, which is where you'd be starting off the PEAP processing.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2017 22:43:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-tacacs-for-peap/m-p/3469467#M528159</guid>
      <dc:creator>Arne Bier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-07-27T22:43:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE TACACS for PEAP</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-tacacs-for-peap/m-p/3469468#M528160</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Arne is correct. The T+ in ISE supports the same set of protocols and proxy as ACS 5.x. PEAP is not a protocol for T+.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Why not evaluating ISE in a lab and test out all use cases?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2017 04:25:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-tacacs-for-peap/m-p/3469468#M528160</guid>
      <dc:creator>hslai</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-07-28T04:25:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

