Re: acct_postgresql+auth_ldap

10/09/2009 04:05 PM, José Johnny RANDRIAMAMPIONONA:: Thank u guys! Please keep us in touch. and if you kept some history of what you've done, I am interested in. -- Architecte Informatique chez Blueline/Gulfsat: Administration Systeme, Recherche & Developpement

Re: perl_rlm and differences FR 1 and 2

David Jones wrote: > Thanks to some handy hints in here, I've had some success with rlm_perl. But > (and there is always a but) > > I've been happily developing against 2.x but have just discovered I need to > actually use 1.x because of RHEL. You can install version 2.x on RHEL. > The rlm

Using another passwd file

Hello Freeradius users I have a challange about using passwd file in freeradius. I'm running Debian 4.0 Kernel 2.6.18-5-486 I have installed FreeRADIUS Version 1.1.3, for host i486-pc-linux-gnu I have activated the following in radiusd.conf file passwd = /etc/passwd

Re: returning an arbitrary attribute from LDAP

Sam Hooker wrote: > I'm trying to ascertain how to have radiusd return an arbitrary attribute > with each successful authentication. My radiusds are doing PEAP/MS-CHAPv2 > against Kerberos for authn, and it seems like activating rlm_ldap for authz > will cause "Auth-Type = LDAP" to enter my worl

Re: over 30 radiusd processes

Craig Campbell wrote: > Up to 65 processes now > > Any ideas how to stop this from happening? Which version are you running? Alan DeKok. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html

802.1x EAP

Hi Ivan I managed to install the certificates on XP machine and works filn. I had configured my AP IP addresss in radius Server and shared secret key.yesterday i can get an Ip address when i click on the SSID today i get limited network connectivity. I hse VLAN 3 on the SSID. It was working well y

perl_rlm and differences FR 1 and 2

Thanks to some handy hints in here, I've had some success with rlm_perl. But (and there is always a but) I've been happily developing against 2.x but have just discovered I need to actually use 1.x because of RHEL. The rlm_perl link of both version 1 and version 2 points to the same documenta

NAS ? What is the best option

I know that this list is not connected with any hardware vendor but I see that every couple days someone cries here NAS problems... I use Mikrotik and I'm not satisfied (duplicated packets, does not support POD correctly , etc) Also, yesterday I see that Cisco can be pain in the a*** too

Re: Session resumption problem

Alan DeKok wrote: > David Mitchell wrote: >> I was searching back in the archives, and in September there was a user >> who reported a problem with session resumption. I'm seeing the exact >> same symptoms I believe, also on Debian 5.0 with OpenSSL 0.9.8g. I never >> saw any follow up? Is there a f

Re: over 30 radiusd processes

y. http://www.eset.com __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4501 (20091012) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html

returning an arbitrary attribute from LDAP

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi folks, I'm trying to ascertain how to have radiusd return an arbitrary attribute with each successful authentication. My radiusds are doing PEAP/MS-CHAPv2 against Kerberos for authn, and it seems like activating rlm_ldap for authz will cause "A

Re: Session resumption problem

David Mitchell wrote: > I was searching back in the archives, and in September there was a user > who reported a problem with session resumption. I'm seeing the exact > same symptoms I believe, also on Debian 5.0 with OpenSSL 0.9.8g. I never > saw any follow up? Is there a fix known for this? I am

Session resumption problem

I was searching back in the archives, and in September there was a user who reported a problem with session resumption. I'm seeing the exact same symptoms I believe, also on Debian 5.0 with OpenSSL 0.9.8g. I never saw any follow up? Is there a fix known for this? I am using a locally compiled versi

Re: current status of other client features via SQL?

Alan Buxey wrote: > what is the current status of support for 'require_message_authenticator', > 'virtual_server' and 'coa_server' options being fed in via rlm_sql - > I'm aware that theres ability to name virtual_server but what happens > if the field is entry - does it go to the default virtual_

RE: Error: Received conflicting packet

Rihad, > > Take your NAS, and throw it in the garbage. Buy a real NAS that > > implements RADIUS. > > > Oh yeah? Isn't Cisco 7260 good enough for you? Hmmm ... A few months ago I was working on a project with a Cisco 72XX terminating PPoE connections from DSL modems. I was using custom SQL cod

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

Hi, > finishing a request in my auth/acct Perl scripts, meaning each request > would take at least 1 second to process, freeradius shouldn't care! It okay...you have a daemon listening on port 1812 ... how many threads or radiusd processes are you running - because , for example, if you have

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

rihad wrote: > Ivan Kalik wrote: >> Exactly. The only problem being your inability to comprehend that >> freeradius is not faulty but it is your perl script that can't cope. > Why do you not understand that even if I put "sleep 1" right before > finishing a request in my auth/acct Perl scripts, mea

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

Ivan Kalik wrote: Being 100% correct protocol-wise means nothing, if the software can't fit well into an environment. Exactly. The only problem being your inability to comprehend that freeradius is not faulty but it is your perl script that can't cope. Why do you not understand that even if I p

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

> Being 100% correct protocol-wise means nothing, if the software can't > fit well into an environment. Exactly. The only problem being your inability to comprehend that freeradius is not faulty but it is your perl script that can't cope. If you are unwilling to alter it in order to speed things u

Using SQL instead of radutmp - WAS Re: Problems with radutmp

t;>> >>>> __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus >>>> signature database 4493 (20091009) __ >>>> >>>> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. >>>> >>>> http://www.eset.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> - >>>> List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See >>>> http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Gerardo Contreras >>> NetX >>> http://netx.com.mx/ >>> T: +52 (614) 2010101 x 121 >>> M: +52 (614) 2479727 >>> Sin costo: 01800 GO2NETX >>> >>> >>> __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus >>> signature database 4494 (20091009) __ >>> >>> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. >>> >>> http://www.eset.com >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus >> signature database 4494 (20091009) __ >> >> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. >> >> http://www.eset.com >> >> >> > > > > __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature > database 4494 (20091009) __ > > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > > __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4500 (20091012) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html

Re: Info: rlm_sql (sql): There are no DB handles to use! skipped 0, tried to connect 0

> accounting { >if (Acct-Status-Type == Start) { >update reply { > Tmp-String-0 = > "%{exec:/etc/freeradius/SCRIPT/userlogin.py %{User-Name}}" > } > } > if (Acct-Status-Type

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

rihad wrote: > Being 100% correct protocol-wise means nothing, if the software can't > fit well into an environment. So you agree that the NAS is broken. > Just a recent example off the top of my > head: dnscache. Its security and DNS protocol support are astonishing. > But due to it being unab

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

Alan DeKok wrote: rihad wrote: Oh yeah? Isn't Cisco 7260 good enough for you? Q: Hi, I have a RADIUS server that is slower than a 386, and a NAS that violates the RADIUS protocol. What should I do? A: Fix the server and the NAS. Q: You bastards! How dare you tell me my equipment is br

current status of other client features via SQL?

hi, just a quick catch-up on using SQL for client configuration... what is the current status of support for 'require_message_authenticator', 'virtual_server' and 'coa_server' options being fed in via rlm_sql - I'm aware that theres ability to name virtual_server but what happens if the field is

Re: getting disconnected.

> I changed the listen IP as you has told me last time. Now I am able to > connect to the free radius, I get the vrf properly configured on the LNS > as expected by the radius and get the proper IP also. But now the problem > is that once I am connected, after 5 secs i get disconnected. According

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

rihad wrote: > Oh yeah? Isn't Cisco 7260 good enough for you? Q: Hi, I have a RADIUS server that is slower than a 386, and a NAS that violates the RADIUS protocol. What should I do? A: Fix the server and the NAS. Q: You bastards! How dare you tell me my equipment is broken! While this

getting disconnected.

Hi, I changed the listen IP as you has told me last time. Now I am able to connect to the free radius, I get the vrf properly configured on the LNS as expected by the radius and get the proper IP also. But now the problem is that once I am connected, after 5 secs i get disconnected. I saw in th

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

Alan DeKok wrote: rihad wrote: Trying for the third time: Do you have any intention of reading the messages here? there are many, many requests of the "Discarding conflicting packet" kind, which for one reason or another are dupped by our Cisco NASes in under one second (see the code). And

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

rihad wrote: > Trying for the third time: Do you have any intention of reading the messages here? > there are many, many requests of the > "Discarding conflicting packet" kind, which for one reason or another > are dupped by our Cisco NASes in under one second (see the code). And > there are ma

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

Ivan Kalik wrote: Our radius-server timeout is high enough: 4 minutes. Once again: I suppose that what freeradius thinks of as "Received conflicting packet ..." are rather a bit delayed packets normally treated as "Discarding conflicting packet ...", i.e. they arrive at freeradius in maybe 1.01+

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

>>> Our radius-server timeout is high enough: 4 minutes. Once again: I >>> suppose that what freeradius thinks of as "Received conflicting packet >>> ..." are rather a bit delayed packets normally treated as "Discarding >>> conflicting packet ...", i.e. they arrive at freeradius in maybe 1.01+ >>>

Re: 1.Troubleshooting MySQL Connections , 2. troubleshooting possible memory leak

Stefan A. wrote: > I still see the memory consumption rising over the time > Output from top every 5 Minutes: > SIZE/RES > 16M/13M > 34M/32M > 53M/51M > 71M/69M > ...it rises about 3-4 MB per Minutes. Ugh. > I read about some issues and tried 2.1.7... still the same. Because the code in rlm_

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

Alan Buxey wrote: Hi, Our radius-server timeout is high enough: 4 minutes. Once again: I suppose that what freeradius thinks of as "Received conflicting packet ..." are rather a bit delayed packets normally treated as "Discarding conflicting packet ...", i.e. they arrive at freeradius in m

Info: rlm_sql (sql): There are no DB handles to use! skipped 0, tried to connect 0

Hi to all, I've installad freeradius on a Debian box with Mysql DB. After the upgrade from freeradius version 1.7 and freeradius 2.x I notice that sometimes, but everyday, the freeradius doesn't respond. I must do a /etc/init.d/freeradius restart In my log: Mon Oct 12 10:24:45 2009 : Info:

Re: Error: Received conflicting packet

Hi, > Our radius-server timeout is high enough: 4 minutes. Once again: I > suppose that what freeradius thinks of as "Received conflicting packet > ..." are rather a bit delayed packets normally treated as "Discarding > conflicting packet ...", i.e. they arrive at freeradius in maybe 1.01+