Have a question on proxying requests in Freeradius. I know how to proxy
requests to other radius servers via the proxy.conf based on domain
etc.. I would like to have one radius server and authenticate off
multiple domain controllers based on domain using ntlm_auth. Right now I
see that you can
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alexander Clouter wrote:
> a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
>>> No one in London wants to go to Sussex though and from my logs it does
>>> not look like anyway from Sussex wants to go to London either ;)
>>>
>>> If someone gives me something better to us
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> No one in London wants to go to Sussex though and from my logs it does
>> not look like anyway from Sussex wants to go to London either ;)
>>
>> If someone gives me something better to use in my RADIUS packets
Peter Lambrechtsen wrote:
> I know the opensuse build server has many flavours on it so it's pretty
> "easy" to get packages built for your flavour there. I have built an
> older version of freeradius on there. So the only thing you really need
> to focus on is getting a working spec file for rpm.
On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 08:46:08AM +1200, Peter Lambrechtsen wrote:
> I know the opensuse build server has many flavours on it so it's
> pretty "easy" to get packages built for your flavour there. I have
> built an older version of freeradius on there. So the only thing you
> really need to
On 7/06/2009, at 5:14 AM, Alan DeKok wrote:
John Dennis wrote:
The primary reason to upgrade is the vastly superior features in
the 2.x
versions, plus 2.x resolves some issues which were present in the 1.x
series. These things will *not* be backported into 1.1.3, it simply
does
not make s
a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
>
>> No one in London wants to go to Sussex though and from my logs it does
>> not look like anyway from Sussex wants to go to London either ;)
>>
>> If someone gives me something better to use in my RADIUS packets then
>> I'm game. Meanwhile I keep meaning to gl
John Dennis wrote:
> The primary reason to upgrade is the vastly superior features in the 2.x
> versions, plus 2.x resolves some issues which were present in the 1.x
> series. These things will *not* be backported into 1.1.3, it simply does
> not make sense.
A complete backport would involve upg
Charles Gregory wrote:
> Hello all!
>
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Tim Sylvester wrote:
>> You should use the latest version of FreeRADIUS...
>
> Not picking on Tim or freeradius in particular, but when I post to
> various lists looking for advice on various pieces of software, I often
> run into the ad
Hello all!
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Tim Sylvester wrote:
You should use the latest version of FreeRADIUS...
Not picking on Tim or freeradius in particular, but when I post to various
lists looking for advice on various pieces of software, I often run into
the advice to upgrade to the latest versi
Hi,
> No one in London wants to go to Sussex though and from my logs it does
> not look like anyway from Sussex wants to go to London either ;)
>
> If someone gives me something better to use in my RADIUS packets then
> I'm game. Meanwhile I keep meaning to glue 'exec' and 'fortune'
> togethe
Hi,
> Should I enable accouning for that?
thats one way of tackling the issue
alan
-
List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Vinit Karandikar wrote:
> Aha ! Where can I find information on this API for what you correctly
> described as "very custom" development that I'm looking to do ?
$ emacs src/include/libradius.h
See also the various other programs included with the server for
examples of how the API is used.
13 matches
Mail list logo
