11 Jul
2005
11 Jul
'05
12:44 p.m.
Artur Hecker <hecker@enst.fr> wrote:
you might be right. yet i think that we might ignore some opportunities which would be possible/supported by diameter.
Like... what?
i really believe that current usage produces demand in the same manner as demand influences the usage. using additional web-based "touches" to trigger server solicitations by the client is indeed quite ridiculous.
I'm not sure what you're referring to here.
the main problem with radius is IMHO its client-server nature. it inherently lacks control. also TCP in dimaeter and defined TLS in proxy mode might be advantageous.
It shouldn't be too hard to write a radsec implementation. Ideally, it could leverage the TLS code in rlm_eap. Alan DeKok.