Thomas Dagonnier wrote:
> yes, I noticed - but are you taking an active role there
> or just supporting by helping with freeradius (as a reference,
> std-based radius server) ?
I'm watching it. There's only so much time in a day.
Alan DeKok.
-
List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www
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 impl
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
> by the vast majority of windows-based computers.
wpa_su
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> My focus was to offer "LAN Access Control", what many people call "NAC".
Switches already do 802.1x for LAN access control. They use RADIUS.
> To me there was no solution for that, from systems management point of
> view.
Packet Fence is widely known and widely u
4 matches
Mail list logo
