On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 07:46 +0200, Alan DeKok wrote:
> And how would the server know if you changed the group?
This is what I was thinking as well.
> If the group changes, you'll need to tell FreeRADIUS to re-evaluate
> the policies.
Ok, makes sense.
Regards,
Ranbir
--
Kanwar Ranbir Sand
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Ivan Kalik wrote:
http://freeradius.org/rfc/rfc2869.html#Acct-Interim-Interval
Interesting, but I agree I don't like the bandwidth implications.
I would only have used them if they were already occuring by default.
You would normaly use radius *client* to send CoA for admi
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
>> If I'm reading Alan's post correctly, freeradius supports CoA packets,
>> but you need to write your own rule/policy to send it. For
>> over-bandwidth scenario, the rule should be while examining
>> interim-update acct packets...
>
> I've never hear
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
If I'm reading Alan's post correctly, freeradius supports CoA packets,
but you need to write your own rule/policy to send it. For
over-bandwidth scenario, the rule should be while examining
interim-update acct packets...
I've never heard of these...
Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 15:09 -0400, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
>> I have a related question, although it's a bit off topic.
>>
>> On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 14:08 +0200, Alan DeKok wrote:
>>> In 2.1.6, the server could *originate* CoA packets. e.g. If the users
>>> bandw
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Kanwar Ranbir
Sandhu wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 15:09 -0400, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
>> I have a related question, although it's a bit off topic.
>>
>> On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 14:08 +0200, Alan DeKok wrote:
>> > In 2.1.6, the server could *originate* CoA pa
On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 15:09 -0400, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
> I have a related question, although it's a bit off topic.
>
> On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 14:08 +0200, Alan DeKok wrote:
> > In 2.1.6, the server could *originate* CoA packets. e.g. If the users
> > bandwidth consumption is over a quota
I have a related question, although it's a bit off topic.
On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 14:08 +0200, Alan DeKok wrote:
> In 2.1.6, the server could *originate* CoA packets. e.g. If the users
> bandwidth consumption is over a quota, send a packet to disconnect them.
Does this include things like changi
I have just committed *full* support for CoA to the "stable" and
"master" branches on git.freeradius.org. I'd like to thank the sponsor
of this work, who wishes to remain anonymous.
In 2.1.6, the server could *originate* CoA packets. e.g. If the users
bandwidth consumption is over a quota, s
t; Apologies if this has been addressed before, but I can't find any
> references in the Wiki or the archives for the use of rfc 3576 Change
> of Authorization messages.
>
> Does FreeRADIUS have any built in way to trigger and/or send a CoA?
> How have others dealt with users
On Sat 27 Jan 2007 02:08, Jeffrey Sewell wrote:
> Apologies if this has been addressed before, but I can't find any
> references in the Wiki or the archives for the use of rfc 3576 Change
> of Authorization messages.
>
> Does FreeRADIUS have any built in way to trigger and/
Jeffrey Sewell wrote:
> Apologies if this has been addressed before, but I can't find any
> references in the Wiki or the archives for the use of rfc 3576 Change
> of Authorization messages.
The server doesn't support it, but there have been discussions around
the topic.
>
Apologies if this has been addressed before, but I can't find any
references in the Wiki or the archives for the use of rfc 3576 Change
of Authorization messages.
Does FreeRADIUS have any built in way to trigger and/or send a CoA?
How have others dealt with users who have exceeded certain l
13 matches
Mail list logo
