Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am not assuming anything, I am _telling_ you that about the only place > anyone uses - signs in identifiers is in cobol and jcl record field > names, and other languages which share portions of the same evolutionary > history.
RADIUS isn't a language. It's a protocol. > I don't know know what you mean. But ONE of us is the author of several > languages, and the other is not. One of us knows something about RADIUS. The other does not. I don't care what Cobol or JCL does. They're not RADIUS. > I expect variable names in lower case, always - "ppp" would be a > variable. Your expectations are wrong. In many computer languages, upper-case words are perfectly valid variable names. Lower-case words are perfectly valid constants. > You are supplying the implementation, therefore we need to know how > to deal with your tool, not how to deal with the RFC. The RFC's define the terms under discussion. If you do not understand the terms under discussion, you will not understand FreeRADIUS. The FreeRADIUS documentation does not re-define the terms under discussion, because it can simply reference the RFC's. > No - I am expecting you to behave less like a hot headed obstinate dummy > and more like the intelligent human being that I expect and fully > believe that you are. If *I* say that your documentation is > incomprehensible in parts, it *is*. Perhaps you missed my point where I said you were the only person I've come across who's had this particular problem. > I have no idea what it contains, since I have not looked. Are you > seriously suggesting that I should take some hours (well minutes) > out of my life to make up for the lack of explanation in your docs? If you are not willing to read the RFC's learn the concepts implemented in FreeRADIUS, you will never succeed in configuring it to do anything. > I am not confused, thank you, you are. And the reason is probably that > you have been working with radius for a decade. <shrug> I can believe you, or I can believe the RADIUS specification. The RADIUS specification describes RADIUS. If you don't like it, complain to the authors of the RFC's. But the terms defined in the specifications are the terms everyone uses when discussing RADIUS. Your opinions in the matter are less than relevant. > My experiment seems to show that the rhs of a = sign is a constant, > which has a value of course, when it is interpreted by radius. But > your examples in the docs seem to show the opposite. You are confused as to what the docs say. You are interpreting them in the most imaginative possible way. No amount of documentation can fix that particular problem. > > It's showing the reply. If you don't understand what the reply is, > > that's your problem. > > Then why is it showing a different reply below? > > Because it is NOT saying "I sent no response" here! It should. When you don't get mail, does the post office send you a letter saying "you didn't get mail today?" Please stop trying to change the RADIUS specification. You can't. Alan DeKok. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
