I see the same thing if tacacs is not running or not reachable. I assume
that socket open/closes just refers to the local device opening a port to
connect from. Explanation is below, I would think that failed attempts would
increment...

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/docs/ios/security/command/reference/sec_s5.html#wp1081799

On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Steve Shaw <[email protected]> wrote:

> I've been testing this on a couple different flavors of 12.4T and even 15.0
> and I've been getting the same behavior.
>
> Basic tacacs config where the tacacs server is unreachable.
>
> tacacs-server host 1.1.1.1
> tacacs-server key ipexpert
>
> Now when I try to test a bogus user account:
>
> Router#test aaa group tacacs+ test test new-code
> User rejected
>
> Weird....and then when I look at the connection statistics regarding the
> tacacs server, I see a socket open and close such as you would see with a
> successful tcp connect. I would expect to see a failed connect attempt
> register:
>
> Router#sh tacacs
>
> Tacacs+ Server            : 1.1.1.1/49
>               Socket opens:          2
>              Socket closes:          2
>              Socket aborts:          0
>              Socket errors:          0
>            Socket Timeouts:          0
>    Failed Connect Attempts:          0
>         Total Packets Sent:          0
>         Total Packets Recv:          0
>
> I do not see the same behavior with a radius group configured. The radius
> server is marked as unreachable as expected.
>
> Can someone clarify this for me? I combed through the config docs and tried
> google but am not having any luck.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
> visit www.ipexpert.com
>
>


-- 
Bryan Bartik
CCIE #23707 (R&S, SP), CCNP
Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc.
URL: http://www.IPexpert.com
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Reply via email to