cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
18563
Views
20
Helpful
20
Replies

MAB with Cisco Phone - Authorization failed

Rene Jorissen
Level 1
Level 1

Hello everybody,

I am using MAB to authenticate clients and Cisco IP Phones against a Microsoft NPS Radius server. Everything is working perfectly, except for 1 Cisco phone. The phone is successfully authentication, but authorization fails. The switch port has the following configuration.

switchport access vlan 500

switchport mode access

switchport nonegotiate

switchport voice vlan 92

no logging event link-status

srr-queue bandwidth share 1 30 35 5

priority-queue out

authentication control-direction in

authentication event server dead action authorize voice

authentication host-mode multi-domain

authentication port-control auto

authentication periodic

authentication timer reauthenticate 10800

authentication timer inactivity 1800

mab

no snmp trap link-status

mls qos trust device cisco-phone

mls qos trust cos

macro description mab

auto qos voip cisco-phone

storm-control broadcast level 5.00

storm-control action shutdown

spanning-tree portfast

spanning-tree bpduguard enable

service-policy input AUTOQOS-SRND4-CISCOPHONE-POLICY

I receive the following RADIUS logging from the client authentication process.

May  7 15:24:53.349: RADIUS:   4D 8F 05 AB 00 00 01 37 00 01 02 00 0A 19 0A 84 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 CE 47 DF 2A A4 B3 70 00 00 00 00 00 00 5F 79           [ M7G*p_y]

May  7 15:24:53.349: RADIUS:  Vendor, Cisco       [26]  34

May  7 15:24:53.349: RADIUS:   Cisco AVpair       [1]   28  "device-traffic-class=voice"

May  7 15:24:53.358: RADIUS(00002749): Received from id 1645/128

May  7 15:24:53.366: %MAB-5-SUCCESS: Authentication successful for client (442b.03a2.f9e8) on Interface Gi1/0/39 AuditSessionID 0A194B0400002706ED82EB13

May  7 15:24:53.374: %AUTHMGR-7-RESULT: Authentication result 'success' from 'mab' for client (442b.03a2.f9e8) on Interface Gi1/0/39 AuditSessionID 0A194B0400002706ED82EB13

SER-02-SW01#clear authentication

May  7 15:24:53.383: %AUTHMGR-5-FAIL: Authorization failed or unapplied for client (442b.03a2.f9e8) on Interface Gi1/0/39 AuditSessionID 0A194B0400002706ED82EB13

I checked online and blog posts and forums suggest to check the usage of downloadable access-list, but they aren't used in the switch. As mentioned, all Cisco IP Phones work perfectly, except this one. I already removed the object from Active Directory and created a new object from scratch, but the same result. I also tried another port on the switch, still an authorization failed.

Currently I have no idea where to look further, so maybe some of you can help me!!!

20 Replies 20

Jatin,

Didn't help either. A reboot of the switch solved the problem. So I guess some kind of bug or something.

Thanx for all the support

Thanks for updating Rene. I suggested for disabling and re-enabling the dot1x globally to see in case it got stuck somewhere. However, it looks the thought didn't go well. Would appreciate if you mark it resolved so that someone else can take benefits out of it.

Your welcome

Have a nice day!!!

Jatin Katyal


- Do rate helpful posts -

~Jatin

msonnie
Level 1
Level 1

Hello Rene,

As you must have observed that it's just an issue with  this particular model of Cisco IP phone, hence I would recommend  checking the various conditions that have been specified on the radius  server for the Cisco IP phone, as usually the dACL's/conditions ( rules)  are a reason for the authorization failure.

May I know if there's any other Authenticator in the Network such as Cisco ISE ?

HTH.

Mohit,

A reboot of the switch did the trick!!!

Mohit,

thanks for Joining the discussion. Actually, I thought the same thing initially that we might need to apply port-based ACL. We did clarify this piece in this post https://supportforums.cisco.com/message/3931416#3931416

Screen shots are attached from NPS.

Jatin Katyal


- Do rate helpful posts -

~Jatin

Great work Jatin and Rene.

I am sometimes amazed working with the technology.

Still all is well that ends well.

Good going.. Guys..!!!!