On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:43 PM, stefan novak <lms.bruba...@gmail.com> wrote: >> If it's "sometimes", then it would be wise to compare the debug log of >> when the client succeeds and when it does not. Also, IIRC RHEL5 has >> 2.1.12 already, so you should upgrade just in case this is a fixed >> bug. >> > > just updated my testserver to 2.1.12. > I test now with rad_eap_test utility to eliminate a client failure. the > behaviour gets more stranger. the test utility also fails sometimes,
How did you determine that it fails? > [root@wlan-radius rad_eap_test-0.23]# ./rad_eap_test -H 172.21.15.1 -P 1812 > -S testtest -u nagios -p xxxx -m WPA-EAP -e PEAP -2 MSCHAPV2 > access-accept; 0 > [root@wlan-radius rad_eap_test-0.23]# ./rad_eap_test -H 172.21.15.1 -P 1812 > -S testtest -u nagios -p xxxx -m WPA-EAP -e PEAP -2 MSCHAPV2 > access-accept; 0 > [root@wlan-radius rad_eap_test-0.23]# ./rad_eap_test -H 172.21.15.1 -P 1812 > -S testtest -u nagios -p xxxx -m WPA-EAP -e PEAP -2 MSCHAPV2 > access-accept; 0 > [root@wlan-radius rad_eap_test-0.23]# ./rad_eap_test -H 172.21.15.1 -P 1812 > -S testtest -u nagios -p xxxx -m WPA-EAP -e PEAP -2 MSCHAPV2 > access-accept; 0 > [root@wlan-radius rad_eap_test-0.23]# ./rad_eap_test -H 172.21.15.1 -P 1812 > -S testtest -u nagios -p xxxx -m WPA-EAP -e PEAP -2 MSCHAPV2 > access-accept; 1 Those are all access-accept, aren't they? The second number (reading from http://wiki.eduroam.cz/rad_eap_test/README) should be latency, not an indication that something failed. CMIIW. -- Fajar - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
