Exactly my point Alan :)
Regards, Liran Tal. On Jan 23, 2008 2:04 PM, Alan DeKok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Pawel Cieplinski wrote: > > I wont be adding NASes, but users will do, so i am thinking 0-10 a day. > > > > Linking to a dynamic list using interal its not a good solution, becouse > i > > will need to wait for list update after adding NAS. > > If the list update takes longer than 1/10 of a second, something is > very wrong. > > > Other solution i am thinking is to run two instances of server and > restart > > them in round robin and use iptables to redirect packets to actual > working > > server. > > Yuck. That's a lot more complicated. > > > Goal is to serveradius to third party as a service, so users will add > their > > own nases, modified them etc, at this stage i cannot really say how many > > times a day i will need a restart, but i am wondering about also about > > following soltion: > > For all that work, why not just fix the server so that it can be > safely HUP'd? > > Honestly, I'm wondering why people will put huge efforts into building > and maintaining multiple machines rather than doing tiny bits of coding. > If the functionality is *that* important, it should be important enough > to add to the server core. > > Alan DeKok. > - > List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See > http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html >
- List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html