<?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: Broadcast control with SGTs and microsegmentation in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/broadcast-control-with-sgts-and-microsegmentation/m-p/4641625#M575826</link>
    <description>Not exactly. So punted traffic toCPU won't be blocked by SGACLs. But&lt;BR /&gt;hardware switched traffic will be blocked by SGACLs.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;**** please remember to rate useful posts&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:48:31 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Mohammed al Baqari</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2022-06-30T13:48:31Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Broadcast control with SGTs and microsegmentation</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/broadcast-control-with-sgts-and-microsegmentation/m-p/4641450#M575816</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;In a Trustsec environment where devices within the same VLAN are not allowed to communicate, layer two traffic like ARP would be also blocked, right? This approach would allow us to have larger subnets without the caveats of the increase on the broadcast traffic that endpoints would have to process, is that correct?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Thanks.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:37:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/broadcast-control-with-sgts-and-microsegmentation/m-p/4641450#M575816</guid>
      <dc:creator>Antonio Macia</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-06-30T09:37:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Broadcast control with SGTs and microsegmentation</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/broadcast-control-with-sgts-and-microsegmentation/m-p/4641625#M575826</link>
      <description>Not exactly. So punted traffic toCPU won't be blocked by SGACLs. But&lt;BR /&gt;hardware switched traffic will be blocked by SGACLs.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;**** please remember to rate useful posts&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:48:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/broadcast-control-with-sgts-and-microsegmentation/m-p/4641625#M575826</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mohammed al Baqari</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-06-30T13:48:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Broadcast control with SGTs and microsegmentation</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/broadcast-control-with-sgts-and-microsegmentation/m-p/4642710#M575884</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;For traffic destined to the switch itself I understand it will be punted to the CPU, but from the endpoints perspective they won't receive other's ARP traffic if not allowed by the matrix, right?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 02 Jul 2022 06:33:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/broadcast-control-with-sgts-and-microsegmentation/m-p/4642710#M575884</guid>
      <dc:creator>Antonio Macia</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-07-02T06:33:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Broadcast control with SGTs and microsegmentation</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/broadcast-control-with-sgts-and-microsegmentation/m-p/4644784#M575949</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Traffic not allowed to destination groups by the TrustSec matrix... should not be allowed (or received) by the destination endpoints.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2022 06:36:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/broadcast-control-with-sgts-and-microsegmentation/m-p/4644784#M575949</guid>
      <dc:creator>thomas</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-07-06T06:36:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

