<?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 Thank you! in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/tcp-udp-8905-8909-with-anyconnect-posture-agent/m-p/2710338#M55173</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2015 19:31:29 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>trevorjenix</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-06-18T19:31:29Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>TCP UDP 8905 8909 with AnyConnect Posture Agent</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/tcp-udp-8905-8909-with-anyconnect-posture-agent/m-p/2710336#M55168</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Documentation and books refer to allowing TCP/UDP ports 8905 and 8909 to the ISE servers in the AGENT-REDIRECT ACLs to make sure NAC agent can be prvisioned, be controlled by ISE and allow keepalive traffic. My question is if this all applies only to the NAC agent or if it applies to the AnyConnect Posture module as well, I couldn't have seemed to find this information anywhere. Are&amp;nbsp;8905 and 8909 ports still used in with:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- AnyConnect provisioning ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- NSP provisioning ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- AnyConnect posture module communication and keep alives ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If not using NAC agent, would it be enough to only include port 8443 to ISE PSN(s) IPs?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 05:48:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/tcp-udp-8905-8909-with-anyconnect-posture-agent/m-p/2710336#M55168</guid>
      <dc:creator>trevorjenix</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T05:48:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>you will be still needing</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/tcp-udp-8905-8909-with-anyconnect-posture-agent/m-p/2710337#M55171</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;you will be still needing 8905 8909 with anyconnect&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:14:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/tcp-udp-8905-8909-with-anyconnect-posture-agent/m-p/2710337#M55171</guid>
      <dc:creator>Venkatesh Attuluri</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-06-18T10:14:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thank you!</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/tcp-udp-8905-8909-with-anyconnect-posture-agent/m-p/2710338#M55173</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2015 19:31:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/tcp-udp-8905-8909-with-anyconnect-posture-agent/m-p/2710338#M55173</guid>
      <dc:creator>trevorjenix</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-06-18T19:31:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: you will be still needing</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/tcp-udp-8905-8909-with-anyconnect-posture-agent/m-p/3729274#M55179</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Some documents show 8909 isn’t used in ise 2.0+&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 21 Oct 2018 10:13:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/tcp-udp-8905-8909-with-anyconnect-posture-agent/m-p/3729274#M55179</guid>
      <dc:creator>Brian Taylor</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-10-21T10:13:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

