Stephan von Krawczynski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only half answered, I'm afraid. I tried auth_log and reply_log, but it is
unclear how to find out corresponding req and reply without any id logging ...
shrug You've got the source code. It's only a 1-line change.
Alan DeKok.
-
List
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 09:11:26 -0500
Alan DeKok [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Something that came to my mind while debugging was: is there a
(simple) way to make freeradius write a protocol of all
access-packets very like the accounting packets' protocol
(detail-file)? I mean besides freeradius
This is my last message on this topic, in the naive hope that you
will pay attention to what I'm saying.
Stephan von Krawczynski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are not wrong, you simply don't listen or don't at least try to
understand the problem, again:
I have a freeradius 0.8.1 and let it
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 15:09:03 -0500
Alan DeKok [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephan von Krawczynski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) It does not recognize at all vendor specific attributes. The reason is
this code part taken from src/modules/rlm_attr_filter/rlm_attr_filter.c :
...
Stephan von Krawczynski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Huh? I don't see why that would be true. If the standard API's are
used to create VP's, then the 'attribute' entry ALWAYS contains the
vendor information.
Hm, this was my first thought, too. But I checked the incoming data via tcpdump
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 09:15:55 -0500
Alan DeKok [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephan von Krawczynski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Huh? I don't see why that would be true. If the standard API's are
used to create VP's, then the 'attribute' entry ALWAYS contains the
vendor information.
Hm,
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 09:15:55 -0500
Alan DeKok [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then you're *very* confused. Go read the dictionary.ascend file.
Both vendors are idiots, and have put their attributes into the base
256 attributes, rather than using VSA's.
THAT'S why you didn't see a vendor Id:
Stephan von Krawczynski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
THAT'S why you didn't see a vendor Id: They weren't using VSA's. If
you had said that in the first place, it would have helped
significantly.
Unfortunately it would not,
If you know more about RADIUS the server than I do, why are you
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:05:19 -0500
Alan DeKok [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephan von Krawczynski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
THAT'S why you didn't see a vendor Id: They weren't using VSA's. If
you had said that in the first place, it would have helped
significantly.
Unfortunately it
Hello,
I'd like to use attr_filter for post_proxy processing. My general idea is to
filter only certain clients/realms and let others (the major part) just
through.
I thought this could be achieved by only putting the realms to filter into the
attr file, but found out that all others get dropped
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 14:55:22 +0100
Stephan von Krawczynski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
If it is I obviously will have to make a catch-all/allow-all default entry.
In trying to do so I experienced that I seem to be unable to include
attributes from outside the standard dictionary. Is this
Stephan von Krawczynski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) It does not recognize at all vendor specific attributes. The reason is this
code part taken from src/modules/rlm_attr_filter/rlm_attr_filter.c :
...
if(reply_item-attribute == check_item-attribute) {
Unfortunately
12 matches
Mail list logo
