Customers who purchase directly from Cisco but do not hold a Cisco service contract and customers who make purchases through third-party vendors but are unsuccessful in obtaining fixed software through their point of sale should obtain upgrades by contacting the Cisco TAC: -cisco-worldwide-contacts.html
We are planning to deploy CISCO ISE with anyconnect NAM as the supplicant. Proposed method of authentication is EAP-FAST with both machine and user authentication. A custom ACL will be applied to each port after successful authentication.
However there is another option which seems to be much simpler than the above, which is to use the windows native supplicant. I understand that windows client does not have same features as anyconnect but following is what I am planning to configure.
Offloading user access control to firewall is much more secure as the switch is not a proper security device. Also, I notice that its much more easier to get the native client working than the anyconnect.
It may be due to native client and the OS understand each other well.
However one of my concerns is that CISCO strongly recommends to use the anyconnect client due its rich feature set and convenience in troubleshooting. But in our network, we dont really need the features like EAP-chaining, MACsec.
I am doing a small deployment and probably will use the native supplicant as anyconnect NAM requires licensing from what I read. However I am wondering regarding ISE posture - is the NAM module required for Posture? Also if I want to do 802.1x machine authentication for users connecting via anyconnect is it possible to be done with the windows native supplicant?
Regarding your statement "ISE Posture doesn't require NAM." do you happen to have any official link or document to refer to this ?? i actually need to show it to higher management in my company as final decision on either to install NAM or go with windows native client, will be theirs.
Hey Guys, New to firewall and have a strange issue. We have a laptop that has cisco any connect client on it but it would not connect. I had created 3 firewall rule the day before the laptop came in and was looking through the rules i had created to see which one was blocking the any connect. Turn out the rule for P2P was causing the issue. Does anyone know why would a P2P rule stop any connect from connecting. Attached is the Application control policy i am using.
760c119bf3