Re: [CentOS] Freeradius, openldap and TLS (thread breaking)

2016-04-15 Thread Andrew Daviel
Thanks for your reply re. TLS On Fri, 15 Apr 2016, Patrick Laimbock wrote: > It's unclear what you mean. I saw a new message on the ML and responded to > it. Where did this 'threading breaking' take place? My mistake; apologies to to other list members. I had replied to an existing message, to

Re: [CentOS] Freeradius, openldap and TLS

2016-04-15 Thread Patrick Laimbock
On 15-04-16 13:14, g wrote: On 04/15/16 04:29, Patrick Laimbock wrote: On 15-04-16 00:39, Andrew Daviel wrote: <<>> Patrick, 'threading breaking' is against centos etiquette and netiquette. replying thread breakers does nothing but encourage them to do so again. many subscribers frown on

Re: [CentOS] Freeradius, openldap and TLS

2016-04-15 Thread Patrick Laimbock
On 15-04-16 00:39, Andrew Daviel wrote: We have a freeradius server using LDAP authentication against openldap. We have had freeradius-3.0.4-6 on CentOS 7 successfully communicating with openldap-servers-2.3.43 on CentOS 5. We need some features in freeradius-3.0.12. When I build that on CentO

[CentOS] Freeradius, openldap and TLS

2016-04-14 Thread Andrew Daviel
We have a freeradius server using LDAP authentication against openldap. We have had freeradius-3.0.4-6 on CentOS 7 successfully communicating with openldap-servers-2.3.43 on CentOS 5. We need some features in freeradius-3.0.12. When I build that on CentOS 6, it initially works, but then deve