Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-08 Thread Jeff Waugh
> > > > Is that like sending in the tanks? :) > > > > > > I like tanks! ;) > > > > Not on my phoneline, thank you. ;) > > Why? The latest version is only an 80K deb! It's small, resource friendly, > fast, etc. I meant the tank. ;) > Well the latest version of Portslave (the one that is too

Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-08 Thread Russell Coker
On Tue, 9 Oct 2001 02:12, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > > Is that like sending in the tanks? :) > > > > I like tanks! ;) > > Not on my phoneline, thank you. ;) Why? The latest version is only an 80K deb! It's small, resource friendly, fast, etc. > > Sure. AFAIK every RADIUS server in the Unix w

Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-08 Thread Jeff Waugh
> > Is that like sending in the tanks? :) > > I like tanks! ;) Not on my phoneline, thank you. ;) > Sure. AFAIK every RADIUS server in the Unix world supports PAM in some way. Cool. I've never really looked at it, as I've always thought, "oh no, that's for like, *lots* of modems." :) > I r

Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-08 Thread Russell Coker
On Tue, 9 Oct 2001 01:27, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > There's nothing stopping you from running Portslave with a single dial-in > > line! > > Is that like sending in the tanks? :) I like tanks! ;) > > If your dial-in setup is serious enough to use a RADIUS server then it's > > big enough for Port

Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-08 Thread Tony Green
* This one time, at band camp, Jeff Waugh said: > > Setting up the RADIUS server is likely to be the most difficult part of a > > Portslave installation. > > Can I authenticate with PAM, etc. somehow? > Well, RADIUS isn't that hard. A simple radius server can auth from a number of different 'b

Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-08 Thread Jeff Waugh
> There's nothing stopping you from running Portslave with a single dial-in > line! Is that like sending in the tanks? :) > If your dial-in setup is serious enough to use a RADIUS server then it's big > enough for Portslave. > > Setting up the RADIUS server is likely to be the most difficult

Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-08 Thread Jeff Waugh
> > > > Is that like sending in the tanks? :) > > > > > > I like tanks! ;) > > > > Not on my phoneline, thank you. ;) > > Why? The latest version is only an 80K deb! It's small, resource friendly, > fast, etc. I meant the tank. ;) > Well the latest version of Portslave (the one that is to

Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-08 Thread Russell Coker
On Tue, 9 Oct 2001 02:12, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > > Is that like sending in the tanks? :) > > > > I like tanks! ;) > > Not on my phoneline, thank you. ;) Why? The latest version is only an 80K deb! It's small, resource friendly, fast, etc. > > Sure. AFAIK every RADIUS server in the Unix

Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-08 Thread Jeff Waugh
> > Is that like sending in the tanks? :) > > I like tanks! ;) Not on my phoneline, thank you. ;) > Sure. AFAIK every RADIUS server in the Unix world supports PAM in some way. Cool. I've never really looked at it, as I've always thought, "oh no, that's for like, *lots* of modems." :) > I

Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-08 Thread Russell Coker
On Tue, 9 Oct 2001 01:27, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > There's nothing stopping you from running Portslave with a single dial-in > > line! > > Is that like sending in the tanks? :) I like tanks! ;) > > If your dial-in setup is serious enough to use a RADIUS server then it's > > big enough for Por

Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-08 Thread Tony Green
* This one time, at band camp, Jeff Waugh said: > > Setting up the RADIUS server is likely to be the most difficult part of a > > Portslave installation. > > Can I authenticate with PAM, etc. somehow? > Well, RADIUS isn't that hard. A simple radius server can auth from a number of different '

Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-08 Thread Jeff Waugh
> There's nothing stopping you from running Portslave with a single dial-in > line! Is that like sending in the tanks? :) > If your dial-in setup is serious enough to use a RADIUS server then it's big > enough for Portslave. > > Setting up the RADIUS server is likely to be the most difficul

Re: Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-06 Thread Russell Coker
On Sat, 6 Oct 2001 11:53, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > Anything that can be done by getty, mgetty, radius-client, etc can be > > done better by Portslave. > > Is portslave appropriate for a smaller system, say with only three dial-in > ports? mgetty is not exactly the most polite software to administer,

Smaller dial-in systems [was: portslave]

2001-10-06 Thread Jeff Waugh
> Anything that can be done by getty, mgetty, radius-client, etc can be done > better by Portslave. Is portslave appropriate for a smaller system, say with only three dial-in ports? mgetty is not exactly the most polite software to administer, and there are lots of times I'd like a simple, eas