Re: Discussion of Issue 146 (fwd)

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

"Bernard Aboba" <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com> wrote:
> From a practical perspective, it would be helpful to know what has been
> implemented.  I'd like to request that anyone on the list who has
> implemented RFC 2618-21 report as to how these objects were implemented.

  We've implemented pieces of RFC 2619, and RFC 2621 in FreeRADIUS.

  Due to implementation issues, it doesn't count MalformedRequests,
BadAuthenticators, or PacketsDropped.  It does count Requests,
InvalidRequests, UnknownTypes, and DupRequests.

  Requests is incremented for every well-formed packet that is
received on a port.

  InvalidRequests is incremented for every packet received from an
unknown address.

  UnknownTypes is incremented for every packet other than
Access-Request/Accounting-Request that is sent to the
authentication/accounting port.

  DupRequests is incremented for every duplicate Access-Request.


  As a result of the implementation issues, the suggested relations
between the counters don't add up.  There have been no complaints, or
discussion of this issue from administrators.

  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/>