I am in the process of implementing Radiator at the moment (converting from
hacked Livingston radiusd), and I wanted to make sure this isn't a problem.
It seems unlikely that this has not already been addressed, but here goes
anyway:
I have looked at my detail logs, and I see varying Acct-Delay-Time fields in
duplicate packets for all of these types of NAS's:
Lucent (Livingston) Portmaster 2
Lucent (Livingston) Portmaster 3
Total Control
Ascend Max 4000
Happily, I don't see any for our Nortel CVX 1800, but it's conceivable that
there just haven't BEEN any duplicates (some of the counts for the other
NAS's were quite low, as well).
Mike Nerone <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Network Operations Manager
Internet Direct, Inc. <http://www.idworld.net/>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of tmercado
> Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2000 3:03 AM
> To: tom minchin
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: (RADIATOR) Duplicates Packets
>
> Hello Tom,
>
> I was checking the TRACE 4 log and I found that the packets are not
> identical. I have the same field like CISCO, the Acct-Delay-Time that
> is different for the duplicate packet and also the timestamp field.
>
> Ok here is the problem, so how can I change radiator to check only the
> NAS-IP-Address and the Acct-Session-Id for duplicates?
> I will check the MAX TNT documentation to see if there are a way to avoid
> send the Acct-Delay-Time field in the packet.
>
> How did you solve the problem with CISCO?
>
> At the end I send a copy of the original packet and the duplicate.
>
> Best regards.
>
> Teddy
===
Archive at http://www.starport.net/~radiator/
To unsubscribe, email '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' with
'unsubscribe radiator' in the body of the message.
