Re: Issue with Guidelines document

[Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>]

Glen Zorn wrote:
>>   That sounds like a bit of a hack to me.  "Yes I've stored the
>> accounting data for bob, and by the way, I'm rebooting in 5 minutes".
> 
> Perhaps you could suggest a better way to accomplish this?  Maybe it's
> really not needed: much more efficient to just wait till the server goes
> away then retry a few times.

  I have no good suggestions here.  Traditionally, yes, the server just
"goes away".

  I'm not even aware of *which* NASes support this behavior.  This
behavior is new to me, and I've been doing this for well over a decade.

>>   I would suggest that CoA might be a better choice for that.
> 
> Excellent suggestion: it's not like the semantics of the CoA exchange bind
> it to a specific session, while the Accounting-Response is a generic
> accounting-related ACK.  

 ... which is sent in response to an Accounting-Request for a particular
user session.

  Just like CoA.

  If the NAS vendors need this functionality, CoA seems to be a better
fit than Accounting-Response.  Few RADIUS servers have traditionally
implemented CoA, so I understand why using Accounting-Response is tempting.

  Now that we have the potential for Status-Server, it is much safer for
the RADIUS server to just "go away".

  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/>