On Jul 27, 2015, at 7:08 , Boris Epstein <borepst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> As for the node deactivation, I think there are several options. IMO, it 
> needs to at least be settable - i.e., if the PF admin declares a node 
> inactive, then inactive it is.
> Secondly, I'd say something like active polling may work. As soon as you poll 
> and fail to detect it at the switch you last saw it plugged in you mark it as 
> inactive. Nothing wrong with that, IMO - if it reappears elsewhere you just 
> mark it as active again.

Polling does not scale all that well and is more trouble that it’s worth.

Some people have thousands of switches.

It would require a separate daemon that polls asynchronously and  reconciles 
the locationlog.

I would need compelling arguments before I start doing that considering that 
RADIUS accounting already gets us 80% of the way there.

> Be that as it may- what is the current SOP for handling these situations?

What situations exactly? 
I must say I am not entirely sure I follow you.

Can you tell us explicitly what you consider an “active” node?

Best regards,
Louis Munro
lmu...@inverse.ca  ::  www.inverse.ca 
+1.514.447.4918 x125  :: +1 (866) 353-6153 x125
Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence 
PacketFence-devel mailing list

Reply via email to