Hi,
Just ran across this IRL:
Calling-Station-Id: GigabitEthernet 1/0/3.2045:2045#587202578###pppoe
c0:d0:44:e4:cf:3b#
But:
Mon Nov 29 16:54:16 2010 : Error: [our_sql] Couldn't insert SQL accounting
START record - ERROR: value too long for type character varying(50)
The situation
Le vendredi 03 décembre 2010 à 11:52 +0100, Josip Rodin a écrit :
Hi,
Just ran across this IRL:
Calling-Station-Id: GigabitEthernet 1/0/3.2045:2045#587202578###pppoe
c0:d0:44:e4:cf:3b#
But:
Mon Nov 29 16:54:16 2010 : Error: [our_sql] Couldn't insert SQL accounting
START
Josip Rodin wrote:
Just ran across this IRL:
Calling-Station-Id: GigabitEthernet 1/0/3.2045:2045#587202578###pppoe
c0:d0:44:e4:cf:3b#
Arg. That's a *stupid* thing to do.
It would have been saner to define VSAs to hold all of this
information, or to re-use the standard
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 12:20:04PM +0100, Alan DeKok wrote:
Josip Rodin wrote:
Just ran across this IRL:
Calling-Station-Id: GigabitEthernet 1/0/3.2045:2045#587202578###pppoe
c0:d0:44:e4:cf:3b#
Arg. That's a *stupid* thing to do.
It would have been saner to define VSAs to
On 03/12/10 11:51, Josip Rodin wrote:
I already told PostgreSQL to just stop limiting it, because AFAICT there's
no actual benefit.
Under postgresql, there is NO performance benefit or storage space
saving using varchar(N) or char(N) over text. The latter should IMHO
always be used, and we
Phil Mayers wrote:
Under postgresql, there is NO performance benefit or storage space
saving using varchar(N) or char(N) over text. The latter should IMHO
always be used, and we modified the SQL schema locally to do that.
Patch ?
Alan DeKok.
-
List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 12:12:52PM +, Phil Mayers wrote:
On 03/12/10 11:51, Josip Rodin wrote:
I already told PostgreSQL to just stop limiting it, because AFAICT there's
no actual benefit.
Under postgresql, there is NO performance benefit or storage space
saving using varchar(N) or
Alan DeKok al...@deployingradius.com writes:
Josip Rodin wrote:
Just ran across this IRL:
Calling-Station-Id: GigabitEthernet 1/0/3.2045:2045#587202578###pppoe
c0:d0:44:e4:cf:3b#
Arg. That's a *stupid* thing to do.
It would have been saner to define VSAs to hold all of this
Bjørn Mork wrote:
I fail to see how that is wrong. It *is* the NASes Calling Station
identificator. What do you suggest a PPPoE concentrator should use?
Something better. VSAs, even.
Using random fields in random printable formats is a bad idea.
RADIUS has the concept of attributes.
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 09:41:07PM +0100, Alan DeKok wrote:
Using random fields in random printable formats is a bad idea.
RADIUS has the concept of attributes. These attributes have names,
specific meanings, and well-defined formats. I have no idea why many
vendors are unable to use them.
10 matches
Mail list logo