On 12/07/07, Phil Mayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 08:33 +0200, Alan DeKok wrote:
Stefan Winter wrote:
It is actually quite important. If you are in a roaming scenario where
your
EAP session goes to your home ISP, it makes no sense to tie the posture
On 11/07/07, Alan DeKok [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's another topic that I'm overall sceptical of NAC, IMO a network should
only reactively shut a client down *after* it did something wrong, not
proactively sniff around the local environment and lock it away at once. But
NAC is here to
On 11/07/07, Alan DeKok [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thomas Dagonnier wrote:
Would you agree to close that part of the discussion ?
Fine.
sorry, this was a late email and I forgot important details like had in
mind with additionnal (NAC) features and the for windows is implied
Ok, as my email adress doesn't show, I'm also working wit Sean (yes, for the
blue giant).
I'll first answer some points raised by alan :
- VMPS in FreeRadius was a surprise and is positive.
- sure, you can get part of the funding (see later).
On 10/07/07, Phil Mayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, we know and agree that freenac isn't in the same league as freeradius.
The form of the announcement was a mistake we're now trying to correct.
I'm really sorry it hurt you and would like you to formally accept my
apologize for this bad communication.
Would you agree to close that part of the
5 matches
Mail list logo
