<?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: Proxy-State Requirement in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/proxy-state-requirement/m-p/3455430#M537532</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Not aware of way to ignore required field.&amp;nbsp; Would be enhancement to become non-compliant!&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Could be ugly, but how about proxying request back to ISE where strip out request and send back to ISE?&amp;nbsp; On forward, the RADIUS source is now ISE, so can apply different policy accordingly.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Craig&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2016 19:11:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Craig Hyps</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-09-16T19:11:06Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Proxy-State Requirement</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/proxy-state-requirement/m-p/3455429#M537529</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Experts,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are trying to integrate ISE with CA AuthMinder as a RADIUS Proxy Server. We can't use RADIUS Token Server due to a requirement to do username domain stripping which RADIUS Token Server doesn't support.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Our authentication attempts through ISE to AuthMinder were silently dropped, nothing in LiveLog.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Upon some investigation, we found that AuthMinder is responding with an Accept, but without any RADIUS attributes.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;PRRT reports the following:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;AcsLogs,2016-09-15 14:55:06,055,DEBUG,0x7f2f9584e700,cntx=0000091231,sesn=THC2EXTISE01/261438722/27,CPMSessionID=0a3440440000a00057da6fb5,user=000248933@lisa.lester,CallingStationID=107.77.199.79,Log_Message=[2016-09-15 14:55:06.054 +00:00 0000065725 11352 WARN&amp;nbsp; &lt;STRONG&gt;RADIUS-Proxy: Response Proxy-State attribute validation failed&lt;/STRONG&gt;, ConfigVersionId=188, Device IP Address=10.52.64.68, Device Port=65487, DestinationIPAddress=10.192.200.41, DestinationPort=1812, RadiusPacketType=AccessRequest, RadiusIdentifier=32, User-Name=000248933, NAS-IP-Address=10.52.64.68, NAS-Port=40960, Called-Station-ID=65.89.98.68, Calling-Station-ID=107.77.199.79, Proxy-State=FirstProxy=10.192.200.41, Proxy-State=Cisco Secure ACSb1d9c820-6a2a-11e6-c000-000000000000-139842593584896-16335, NAS-Port-Type=Virtual, Tunnel-Client-Endpoint=(tag=0) 107.77.199.79, cisco-av-pair=audit-session-id=0a3440440000a00057da6fb5, cisco-av-pair=ip:source-ip=107.77.199.79, cisco-av-pair=coa-push=true, CVPN3000/ASA/PIX7x-Tunnel-Group-Name=SSLClient, CVPN3000/ASA/PIX7x-Client-Type=3, AcsSessionID=THC2EXTISE01/261438722/27, SelectedAccessService=AUTH_MDL_SEQUENCE, CPMSessionID=0a3440440000a00057da6fb5, Response={RadiusPacketType=AccessAccept; },],MessageFormatter.cpp:94&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;RFC for RADIUS at &lt;A href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2865#page-53" title="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2865#page-53"&gt;RFC 2865 - Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS) &lt;/A&gt;states:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This Attribute is available to be sent by a proxy server to&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp; another server when forwarding an Access-Request and &lt;STRONG&gt;MUST be&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp; returned unmodified&lt;/STRONG&gt; in the Access-Accept, Access-Reject or&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp; Access-Challenge.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It's clear that Auth Minder is non-Compliant here. Is there anything that can be enabled in ISE to ignore Proxy-State? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can you think of some other clever way to strip the username? In the example above the username comes in as &lt;SPAN style="font-size: 13.3333px;"&gt;000248933@lisa.lester and we only need to send &lt;SPAN style="font-size: 13.3333px;"&gt;000248933 to AuthMinder&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2016 15:27:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/proxy-state-requirement/m-p/3455429#M537529</guid>
      <dc:creator>vibobrov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-09-15T15:27:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Proxy-State Requirement</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/proxy-state-requirement/m-p/3455430#M537532</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Not aware of way to ignore required field.&amp;nbsp; Would be enhancement to become non-compliant!&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Could be ugly, but how about proxying request back to ISE where strip out request and send back to ISE?&amp;nbsp; On forward, the RADIUS source is now ISE, so can apply different policy accordingly.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Craig&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2016 19:11:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/proxy-state-requirement/m-p/3455430#M537532</guid>
      <dc:creator>Craig Hyps</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-09-16T19:11:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Proxy-State Requirement</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/proxy-state-requirement/m-p/3455431#M537535</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks, Craig,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yeah, i was thinking about our trusty looping technique, but it does get ugly.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We asked the customer to reach out to CA to see if they can make their product be RFC compliant.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2016 23:59:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/proxy-state-requirement/m-p/3455431#M537535</guid>
      <dc:creator>vibobrov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-09-16T23:59:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

