<?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: dACL implementation question use case in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/dacl-implementation-question-use-case/m-p/5136571#M590272</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;It looks right to me, but I find port based dACLs require testing to be 100% sure.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Use Case 2 could be optimised a bit by removing the first permit tcp rule, since, logically, it's taken care of by the final permit ip any any.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 2024 20:59:30 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Arne Bier</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-06-26T20:59:30Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>dACL implementation question use case</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/dacl-implementation-question-use-case/m-p/5136441#M590266</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi experts,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I need to use dACL from ISE to filter MAB groups. I understand that the best way is of course to use a firewall, but this is not currently possible on this part of the network.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I have 2 use cases&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Use Case 1&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-left" image-alt="Sans titre.png" style="width: 712px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/221682i2528148AEF09D4FD/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="Sans titre.png" alt="Sans titre.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;- the endpoint 10.0.0.1 needs to access the server 172.1.1.1 on port 80:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;- the server needs to access the endpoint for SNMP polling &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;- drop anything else from the endpoint&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;In the end the dACL would look like this correct?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;LI-CODE lang="markup"&gt;permit tcp any host 172.1.1.1 eq 80
permit udp any eq snmp host 172.1.1.1
deny ip any any&lt;/LI-CODE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Use Case 2&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-left" image-alt="Sans titrew.png" style="width: 712px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/221684i72D0A28BA4CAF610/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="Sans titrew.png" alt="Sans titrew.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;- the endpoint can access only 1 server on the network (and nothing else on the subnet 172.1.1.0/24)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;- the endpoint can access Internet&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;LI-CODE lang="markup"&gt;permit tcp any host 172.1.1.1 eq 80
deny ip any 172.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
permit ip any any&lt;/LI-CODE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Is it correct?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thank you for the help&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 2024 15:58:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/dacl-implementation-question-use-case/m-p/5136441#M590266</guid>
      <dc:creator>REJR77</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-06-26T15:58:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: dACL implementation question use case</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/dacl-implementation-question-use-case/m-p/5136571#M590272</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;It looks right to me, but I find port based dACLs require testing to be 100% sure.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Use Case 2 could be optimised a bit by removing the first permit tcp rule, since, logically, it's taken care of by the final permit ip any any.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 2024 20:59:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/dacl-implementation-question-use-case/m-p/5136571#M590272</guid>
      <dc:creator>Arne Bier</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-06-26T20:59:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

