Re: [RADIATOR] Multithreading Radiator in Windows Server 2008/2012

[Hugh Irvine]

Hello Alan -

Yes absolutely - you typically want authentication to operate as quickly as 
possible, and its usually a fairly lightweight lookup operation.

Accounting on the other hand is less time-critical and usually involves more 
processing to store the records.

Therefore it makes sense to have these operations running in separate processes.

Ie.

….

# Authentication Instance Configuration
# Listen for authentication requests only

AuthPort1645, 1812

AcctPort

…..

….

# Accounting Instance Configuration
# Listen for accounting requests only

AuthPort

AcctPort1646, 1813

…..

regards

Hugh


> On 17 Oct 2015, at 23:39, Alan Buxey  wrote:
> 
> >BTW - it is generally a good idea to >have separate authentication and 
> >>accounting instances as well (ie. one >Windows service for authentication 
> >on >1645 and/or 1812, and another >Windows service for accounting on >1646 
> >and/or 1813).
> 
> I'm guessing this is also true for Unix/linux/solaris installs too?
> 
> alan


--

Hugh Irvine
h...@open.com.au

Radiator: the most portable, flexible and configurable RADIUS server 
anywhere. SQL, proxy, DBM, files, LDAP, NIS+, password, NT, Emerald, 
Platypus, Freeside, TACACS+, PAM, external, Active Directory, EAP, TLS, 
TTLS, PEAP, TNC, WiMAX, RSA, Vasco, Yubikey, MOTP, HOTP, TOTP,
DIAMETER, SIM, etc. 
Full source on Unix, Linux, Windows, MacOSX, Solaris, VMS, NetWare etc.

___
radiator mailing list
radiator@open.com.au
http://www.open.com.au/mailman/listinfo/radiator

Re: [RADIATOR] Multithreading Radiator in Windows Server 2008/2012

[Hugh Irvine]

Hello Nadav -

Each instance of Radiator would be configured as a separate Windows service, 
with the “frontend” listening on the standard RADIUS ports (1645/1646 and/or 
1812/1813).

The “backend” Radiator instances would listen on whatever ports you want (ie. 
11812/11813, and 12812/12813, and 13812/13813, whatever…).

The “frontend” instance would then use AuthBy PROXY clauses to proxy to the 
corresponding “backend’s”.

BTW - it is generally a good idea to have separate authentication and 
accounting instances as well (ie. one Windows service for authentication on 
1645 and/or 1812, and another Windows service for accounting on 1646 and/or 
1813).

regards

Hugh


> On 16 Oct 2015, at 17:47, Nadav Hod  wrote:
> 
> Hi Hugh,
> 
> I came across your post on the matter from a few years back:
> http://www.open.com.au/pipermail/radiator/2012-August/018488.html
> 
> I was wondering if you could explain how this is performed on the same 
> Windows Server. For example, assuming I wanted to have a front-end server as 
> one process and three other Radiator processes for authenticating different 
> kinds of traffic. How would this be configured so that the backend could 
> communicate with the frontend and vica versa?
> 
> Would I need to install a different Windows service for each of these 
> processes? How would I ensure that each process would run under a different 
> core? Could one process which is CPU-intensive also use up a different core 
> if necessary so that this doesn't cause a bottleneck?


--

Hugh Irvine
h...@open.com.au

Radiator: the most portable, flexible and configurable RADIUS server 
anywhere. SQL, proxy, DBM, files, LDAP, NIS+, password, NT, Emerald, 
Platypus, Freeside, TACACS+, PAM, external, Active Directory, EAP, TLS, 
TTLS, PEAP, TNC, WiMAX, RSA, Vasco, Yubikey, MOTP, HOTP, TOTP,
DIAMETER, SIM, etc. 
Full source on Unix, Linux, Windows, MacOSX, Solaris, VMS, NetWare etc.

___
radiator mailing list
radiator@open.com.au
http://www.open.com.au/mailman/listinfo/radiator