Hi Mike,
        I'm trying to find the section in the RADIUS spec where is says
don't respond if the Identifer is the same. Unfortunately Network
Solutions have hidden the RFCs somewhere so I'm looking at the Lucent
site (http://www.livingston.com/tech/technotes/500/510018.html). On
page 13 it says:

---
Identifier
        The Identifier field MUST be changed whenever the content of the
        Attributes field changes, and whenever a valid reply has been
        received for a previous request.  For retransmissions, the
        Identifier MUST remain unchanged.
---

        None of the Attributes have changed, so the NAS is definitely doing
a resend. If it's a mis-implementation of RADIUS by Cisco I can beat them
around the head with it. 

[EMAIL PROTECTED]     

On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 08:38:42AM +1000, Mike McCauley wrote:
> 
> Actually, the RFC explicitly says that the server should not respond to
> packets with a duplicate identifier.
> 
> Cheers
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------
> Mike McCauley                                 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Open System Consultants                 +61 3 9598 0985
> 
> Mike is travelling right now, and there may be delays
> in our correspondence.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tom minchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Arnie Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thursday, April 08, 1999 7:40 PM
> Subject: Re: (RADIATOR) problem with Radiator duplicate detection
> 
> 
> >On Thu, Apr 08, 1999 at 10:09:28AM +0100, Arnie Roberts wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, April 07, 1999 3:13 AM, tom minchin
> [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> >>
> >> > * yes it's bad the packet is being lost, but RADIUS should recover from
> that.
> >>
> >> How??
> >> RADIUS runs over UDP. Surely this is a problem with RADIUS not Radiator.
> >>
> >
> >Radiator is detecting the repeated Access-Request as a duplicate and
> ignoring
> >it. It should, according to RADIUS, resend the Access-Accept to the NAS not
> >discard it as obviously the NAS didn't get the first one as it's stilling
> >asking.
> >
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >===
> >To unsubscribe, email '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' with
> >'unsubscribe radiator' in the body of the message.
> >
> 
> ===
> To unsubscribe, email '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' with
> 'unsubscribe radiator' in the body of the message.

===
To unsubscribe, email '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' with
'unsubscribe radiator' in the body of the message.

Reply via email to