Re: -01 version of Chargeable User Identity

["Alan DeKok" <aland@ox.org>]

Barney Wolff <barney@databus.com> wrote:
> Keeping state in RADIUS, where there is no "connection" between client
> and server to notice reboots and possible state loss, is, imho, a truly
> bad idea.

  Many servers already keep per-user, and per-NAS state, for a host of
reasons.  While not perfect, it works well enough to be deployed in
enterprise-scale systems.

  Can you give more details as to what part of "keeping state" you're
objecting to, and why?  I understand that tracking NAS capabilities in
proxied situations is awkward, but I don't think it's impossible.

  Alan DeKok.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>