On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Keegan Holley <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand the drawback of TACACS. It's obvious that > redundancy is needed there. If you're already using TACACS it seems easier > to place it there. I'm not sure I like the idea of a network using local > auth everywhere but to each his own. If you use EEM what's to stop other > "senior" engineers from just removing the script temporarily? We use RADIUS, which doesn't support administratively disabling commands (unfortunately.) I'm also trying to protect from accidental stupidity, rather than stupidity with intent. (If someone starts disabling safeguards, their level of accountability increases accordingly.) Appreciate the suggestion though - just doesn't quite work for us. -- Tim:> _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
