Is there any reason why the "usergroup" table is not calle d"radgroup" by default to fit with the other radius tables? -- Peter Nixon http://www.peternixon.net/ PGP Key: http://www.peternixon.net/public.asc
Peter Nixon <listuser@peternixon.net> wrote:
Is there any reason why the "usergroup" table is not calle d"radgroup" by default to fit with the other radius tables?
No idea. Let's try to be consistent in 2.0. Alan DeKok. -- http://deployingradius.com - The web site of the book http://deployingradius.com/blog/ - The blog
On Thu 21 Sep 2006 17:28, Alan DeKok wrote:
Peter Nixon <listuser@peternixon.net> wrote:
Is there any reason why the "usergroup" table is not calle d"radgroup" by default to fit with the other radius tables?
No idea. Let's try to be consistent in 2.0.
ok. done. -- Peter Nixon http://www.peternixon.net/ PGP Key: http://www.peternixon.net/public.asc
why not "radusergroup" That's what I modified mine to be more consistant. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Nixon" <listuser@peternixon.net> To: "FreeRadius developers mailing list" <freeradius-devel@lists.freeradius.org> Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 7:26 AM Subject: Re: SQL usergroup table
- List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html
On Tue 17 Oct 2006 05:56, Duane Cox wrote:
why not "radusergroup"
That's what I modified mine to be more consistant.
If you check cvs you will see that that is what I did several weeks ago :-) Cheers -- Peter Nixon http://www.peternixon.net/ PGP Key: http://www.peternixon.net/public.asc
On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 10:28 -0400, Alan DeKok wrote:
Peter Nixon <listuser@peternixon.net> wrote:
Is there any reason why the "usergroup" table is not calle d"radgroup" by default to fit with the other radius tables?
No idea. Let's try to be consistent in 2.0.
Is it not because it maps users to groups ? "radgroup" could refer to any kind of group association but I can't think of any reason why it couldn't be changed, except that a note in really large letters should be put on the download page to ensure administrators don't get miffed when upgrading, and possibly getting bitten by the change.
On Fri 22 Sep 2006 21:40, Guy Fraser wrote:
On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 10:28 -0400, Alan DeKok wrote:
Peter Nixon <listuser@peternixon.net> wrote:
Is there any reason why the "usergroup" table is not calle d"radgroup" by default to fit with the other radius tables?
No idea. Let's try to be consistent in 2.0.
Is it not because it maps users to groups ?
"radgroup" could refer to any kind of group association but I can't think of any reason why it couldn't be changed, except that a note in really large letters should be put on the download page to ensure administrators don't get miffed when upgrading, and possibly getting bitten by the change.
I already changed it to radusergroup for precisely this reason :-) Cheers -- Peter Nixon http://www.peternixon.net/ PGP Key: http://www.peternixon.net/public.asc
participants (4)
-
Alan DeKok -
Duane Cox -
Guy Fraser -
Peter Nixon