Re: Upgrading from 1.0.2 to 2.0.0 problems

2008-01-17 Thread William
On Thursday 17 January 2008 02:44:13 Alan DeKok wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > you are calling the unix auth module before suffix - therefore the magic > > hasnt yet happened. I'd try putting the unix module after the modules > > that play around with User-Name > > i.e. the order in the de

Re: Upgrading from 1.0.2 to 2.0.0 problems

2008-01-16 Thread Alan DeKok
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > you are calling the unix auth module before suffix - therefore the magic > hasnt yet happened. I'd try putting the unix module after the modules > that play around with User-Name i.e. the order in the default configuration is wrong, too. I've fixed it. Alan DeKo

Re: Upgrading from 1.0.2 to 2.0.0 problems

2008-01-16 Thread A . L . M . Buxey
Hi, the first request looks like this.NOTE the test order... > rad_recv: Access-Request packet from host 192.168.1.64 port 32775, id=35, > User-Name = "test" > +- entering group authorize > ++[preprocess] returns ok > ++[chap] returns noop > ++[mschap] returns noop > ++[unix] returns

Re: Upgrading from 1.0.2 to 2.0.0 problems

2008-01-16 Thread William
On Wednesday 16 January 2008 16:58:09 Alan DeKok wrote: > William wrote: > > The situation is that we have a lot of legacy users who only enter a > > username, without realm information, and passwords for their connections. > > Those work fine. When newer users enter [EMAIL PROTECTED] for their >

Re: Upgrading from 1.0.2 to 2.0.0 problems

2008-01-16 Thread Alan DeKok
William wrote: > The situation is that we have a lot of legacy users who only enter a > username, > without realm information, and passwords for their connections. Those work > fine. When newer users enter [EMAIL PROTECTED] for their password I need to > strip off the realm, and authenticate

Re: Upgrading from 1.0.2 to 2.0.0 problems

2008-01-16 Thread William
On Wednesday 16 January 2008 16:39:38 Alan DeKok wrote: > Configure... what, exactly? I think you're getting stuck on trying to > make particular configurations "work". You should instead state the > requirements as clearly as possible. Odds are that a simple > configuration will be straightfo

Re: Upgrading from 1.0.2 to 2.0.0 problems

2008-01-16 Thread Alan DeKok
William wrote: > What I am trying to do is set up my main realm to handle either no realm or > deal with the default realm, I'm not sure what you mean by that. Do you want those requests to both be proxied, or handled in the local server? Talking about the local server as a "main realm" co

Upgrading from 1.0.2 to 2.0.0 problems

2008-01-16 Thread William
Greetings, I have looked at the documentation included with the 2.0 distribution for setting up radius 2.0 and I am either blind, or it doesn't have when I am looking for. What I am trying to do is set up my main realm to handle either no realm or deal with the default realm, The problem