3550 port control Dot1x

From: simon hart (simon@harttel.com)
Date: Tue Oct 18 2005 - 17:03:27 GMT-3

Next message: Daniel Berlinski: "CBWFQ> Bandwidth available to "class-default""
Previous message: Chris Lewis: "Re: Limiting bandwidth on an interface"
Next in thread: Edwards, Andrew M: "RE: 3550 port control Dot1x"
Maybe reply: Edwards, Andrew M: "RE: 3550 port control Dot1x"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Hi all,

I have been reviewing the Dot1x commands. I have looked at Dot1x
port-control |auto | force-authorized | force-unauthorized

Now, my understanding of force-unauthorized is that the port will not
authorize anything as any attached device regardless of Dot1x authentication
will be treated as unauthorized and thus will not be able to use the port.
Can anyone shed any light on the pracitcality of this? Surely if you do not
wish a port to be used by anyone you would then just shut it down

Simon

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.12.2/137 - Release Date: 16/10/2005

Next message: Daniel Berlinski: "CBWFQ> Bandwidth available to "class-default""
Previous message: Chris Lewis: "Re: Limiting bandwidth on an interface"
Next in thread: Edwards, Andrew M: "RE: 3550 port control Dot1x"
Maybe reply: Edwards, Andrew M: "RE: 3550 port control Dot1x"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Nov 06 2005 - 22:00:51 GMT-3