08-18-2014 02:28 AM - edited 03-10-2019 09:56 PM
Question - which to choose?
Scenarios with devices attaching to 3850s 150-1.EZ2, ISE v1.2
1. IP Phone with daisy-chained PC
2. dumb hub with IP Phone and multiple PCs
authentication host-mode multi-domain
or
authentication host-mode multi-auth
AND
authentication violation replace
or
authentication violation restrict
Regards
Solved! Go to Solution.
08-18-2014 05:20 PM
For all of my deployments I have used "authentication host-mode multi-auth" That way I generate a more generic template and not have to go back and touch ports that might have a switch attached to it. So I would recommend using this as well unless there is a driver behing not to.
Be careful with "dumb hubs" connecting to a 802.1x enabled port. I have ran into situations where the dumb hub/switch would let dot1x authenticatons go through but then would not pass the EAPoL logg-off message, thus causing issues when a new device would connect. I suppose in such situation the "authentication violation replace" might help but then you can run into other unforseen issues. I had a couple of deployments where the EAPoL traffic was completely dropped and never reached the Radius server. Thus, I have been lucky of convincing my customers to replace those with a "compact" version of the Cisco switch family (2960c, 3560c) so I have always used "authentication violation restrict"
I know this doesn't answer your quesitons directly but I hope it helps
Thank you for rating helpful posts!
08-18-2014 05:20 PM
For all of my deployments I have used "authentication host-mode multi-auth" That way I generate a more generic template and not have to go back and touch ports that might have a switch attached to it. So I would recommend using this as well unless there is a driver behing not to.
Be careful with "dumb hubs" connecting to a 802.1x enabled port. I have ran into situations where the dumb hub/switch would let dot1x authenticatons go through but then would not pass the EAPoL logg-off message, thus causing issues when a new device would connect. I suppose in such situation the "authentication violation replace" might help but then you can run into other unforseen issues. I had a couple of deployments where the EAPoL traffic was completely dropped and never reached the Radius server. Thus, I have been lucky of convincing my customers to replace those with a "compact" version of the Cisco switch family (2960c, 3560c) so I have always used "authentication violation restrict"
I know this doesn't answer your quesitons directly but I hope it helps
Thank you for rating helpful posts!
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide