<?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: Port-security maximum_addr and Wireless Network! in Wireless</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4272322#M225189</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Ok, and what about the Standalone based architecture ?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2021 12:00:53 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>benahmeddaho_MOURAD</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-01-14T12:00:53Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Port-security maximum_addr and Wireless Network!</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4265856#M224710</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi, Everyone!&lt;BR /&gt;A cisco AP can be configured as &lt;STRONG&gt;LWAP&lt;/STRONG&gt; or &lt;STRONG&gt;Standalone&lt;/STRONG&gt;. Respectively, &lt;STRONG&gt;access&lt;/STRONG&gt; or &lt;STRONG&gt;trunk&lt;/STRONG&gt; to the SWA (layer2 Access Switch)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;For an ex: is it recommanded and possible to configure &lt;EM&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;#Port-security max-addr&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/EM&gt; on the SWA port. Whethere access or trunk?&lt;BR /&gt;NB : The network can be &lt;STRONG&gt;wlan&lt;/STRONG&gt;[known users number]. or &lt;STRONG&gt;guest_wlan&lt;/STRONG&gt;[unknown users number] !&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2021 19:57:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4265856#M224710</guid>
      <dc:creator>benahmeddaho_MOURAD</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-05T19:57:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Port-security maximum_addr and Wireless Network!</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4265869#M224712</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Personally, I would not use - since we do not know the number of users connects to AP. but good to have some Limitations to configure. but bare in mind in case of more MAC address come in security the action takes place depends on what you like to do.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;here is some reference document :&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://cammyd.com/cisco-port-security-settings-and-wireless-access-points/" target="_blank"&gt;https://cammyd.com/cisco-port-security-settings-and-wireless-access-points/&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 02 Jan 2021 13:12:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4265869#M224712</guid>
      <dc:creator>balaji.bandi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-01-02T13:12:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Port-security maximum_addr and Wireless Network!</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4265873#M224713</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;local or central mode?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 02 Jan 2021 13:40:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4265873#M224713</guid>
      <dc:creator>MHM Cisco World</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-01-02T13:40:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Port-security maximum_addr and Wireless Network!</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4266391#M224758</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Dear Sir,&lt;BR /&gt;I agree totally with you, but is there another way to &lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;U&gt;&lt;EM&gt;prevent&lt;/EM&gt; &lt;/U&gt;#Mac_Flooding_Attack&lt;/STRONG&gt; in the wireless networks without using port-security!&lt;BR /&gt;Cordially!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2021 13:49:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4266391#M224758</guid>
      <dc:creator>benahmeddaho_MOURAD</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-01-04T13:49:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Port-security maximum_addr and Wireless Network!</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4266396#M224759</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Sir!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Im Sorry, i did not get your question!&lt;BR /&gt;Do you mean AP standalone || WLC architecture based!&lt;BR /&gt;Cordialy!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2021 13:53:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4266396#M224759</guid>
      <dc:creator>benahmeddaho_MOURAD</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-01-04T13:53:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Port-security maximum_addr and Wireless Network!</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4267336#M224831</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If you’re using WLC and If the AP in local mode or FlexConnect central switching then you don’t need to worry about the MAC addresses because the switchport will show only one MAC which is the AP Eth MAC Address because the AP will tunnel all the traffic from all connected clients to the WLC.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2021 19:45:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4267336#M224831</guid>
      <dc:creator>Grendizer</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-01-05T19:45:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Port-security maximum_addr and Wireless Network!</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4272322#M225189</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Ok, and what about the Standalone based architecture ?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2021 12:00:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4272322#M225189</guid>
      <dc:creator>benahmeddaho_MOURAD</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-01-14T12:00:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Port-security maximum_addr and Wireless Network!</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4272571#M225214</link>
      <description>If you mean autonomous then all MAC Addresses will be showing from that AP&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2021 16:50:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/port-security-maximum-addr-and-wireless-network/m-p/4272571#M225214</guid>
      <dc:creator>Grendizer</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-01-14T16:50:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

