On 7 Oct 2013, at 11:31, a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Well you want the probes to go through and hit your backed authentication
>> servers,
>> and your databases, and any external resource.
>
> ..and get a valid user with access accept? bad. you are better off just
> semding a r
Hi,
> Well you want the probes to go through and hit your backed authentication
> servers,
> and your databases, and any external resource.
..and get a valid user with access accept? bad. you are better off just
semding a reject -
just like RADIUS status server probes. it would be nice if th
On 7 Oct 2013, at 10:36, a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> We're finding these nuggets of code as we dig deeper into James's
>> legacy config. If the Access-Accept response is not required, then
>> presumably I can ditch that entire code block and let the
>> wisms-testing auth attempt go
Hi,
> We're finding these nuggets of code as we dig deeper into James's
> legacy config. If the Access-Accept response is not required, then
> presumably I can ditch that entire code block and let the
> wisms-testing auth attempt go through the system as any other user.
yesbut you'd be better
On 7 Oct 2013, at 09:59, Jonathan Gazeley
wrote:
> On 07/10/13 08:40, a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
if (Service-Type == "NAS-Prompt-User") {
if (NAS-IP-Address =~ /^172\.17\.107\./) {
if (User-Name =~ /^wisms\-testing/) {
update control {
Auth-
On 07/10/13 08:40, a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
Hi,
if (Service-Type == "NAS-Prompt-User") {
if (NAS-IP-Address =~ /^172\.17\.107\./) {
if (User-Name =~ /^wisms\-testing/) {
update control {
Auth-Type := Accept
}
ouch do you realise how dangerous that is? there
should
On 10/07/2013 08:40 AM, a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
Hi,
if (Service-Type == "NAS-Prompt-User") {
if (NAS-IP-Address =~ /^172\.17\.107\./) {
if (User-Name =~ /^wisms\-testing/) {
update control {
Auth-Type := Accept
}
ouch do you realise how dangerous that is? there
s
Hi,
> >if (Service-Type == "NAS-Prompt-User") {
> > if (NAS-IP-Address =~ /^172\.17\.107\./) {
> > if (User-Name =~ /^wisms\-testing/) {
> >update control {
> > Auth-Type := Accept
> >}
ouch do you realise how dangerous that is? there
should be no need to send an access accept
On 7 Oct 2013, at 02:30, Bruce Nunn wrote:
> Thanks for the heads-up. I will look for this this coming weekend when I get
> 2.2.2 in production.
>
> Jonathan Gazeley wrote:
>
>> We've recently upgraded our radius servers from 2.1.12 (CentOS 6
>> packaged default) to 2.2.1 (latest stable fr
Thanks for the heads-up. I will look for this this coming weekend when I get
2.2.2 in production.
Jonathan Gazeley wrote:
>We've recently upgraded our radius servers from 2.1.12 (CentOS 6
>packaged default) to 2.2.1 (latest stable from FR, built by hand).
>
>A config that used to work under 2
>
> Does anyone have any tips for debugging this in a minimally disruptive way?
> At the moment we don't have any development WLCs but we might have to get
> some so we can have a separate environment for testing. In the meantime I'm
> trying to get this code block to work so we can use the new
We've recently upgraded our radius servers from 2.1.12 (CentOS 6
packaged default) to 2.2.1 (latest stable from FR, built by hand).
A config that used to work under 2.1.12 no longer appears to work the
same way under 2.2.1. Our Cisco WLCs send periodic probes in the form of
a test authenticati
12 matches
Mail list logo
