<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1515" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Good morning Mr. DeKok:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I already sent this message to the list once, but
i'm not sure that it got there because i was having email server issues that
day. If you have already seen this and responded, i did not get your response.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I changed my WUG timeout from 5 sec to 30
seconds as a test. The same thing was happening as usual. I would get a few good
responses and then WUG would tell me that Freeradius was down. Then i changed my
timeout to 60 seconds. I have not gotten a message from WUG telling me that
Freeradius is down since i did that and that was several days ago.. Does that
mean that my first suspision was correct about Freeradius taking up to 60
seconds to respond to a sent request at times? Also, i know that you said WUG
should re-transmit the packet in a case like this, but i have WUG set to only
send<BR>one request every 20 minutes because i monitor my entire network with
WUG and if i sent a request to Freeradius every few seconds, i would have to
send a "request" to all of my servers every few seconds. With WUG it doesn't let
you send requests to different things at different times. It's set to poll
everything at once. I'm coming to the conclusion that i paid way too much for a
crappy monitoring system. Thanks!<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Linda Pagillo<BR>Director of Technical
Services<BR>N2 The Net, LLC<BR><A
href="mailto:lpagillo@n2thenet.com">lpagillo@n2thenet.com</A><BR>931-372-9179</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>