Hi All I am new for RADIUS server authentication and looking to implement a RADIUS client. I found that there are many RADIUS client library available and most popular are libradius and libfreeradius. figuring out that which one is best and what is pros and cons of each one. Any information related to this will be more helpful to me. Thanks Arvind
Arvind Gupta wrote:
I am new for RADIUS server authentication and looking to implement a RADIUS client. I found that there are many RADIUS client library available and most popular are libradius and libfreeradius. figuring out that which one is best and what is pros and cons of each one. Any information related to this will be more helpful to me.
The freeradius-client code is BSD licensed, but I don't like the API. The libfreeradius-radius code is LGPL'd. It's much better, but it does have the LGPL. There is a pressing need for a BSD licensed RADIUS library. Too many vendors "roll their own". And get pretty much everything wrong. Alan DeKok.
On 07/26/2012 09:11 AM, Alan DeKok wrote:
Arvind Gupta wrote:
I am new for RADIUS server authentication and looking to implement a RADIUS client. I found that there are many RADIUS client library available and most popular are libradius and libfreeradius. figuring out that which one is best and what is pros and cons of each one. Any information related to this will be more helpful to me.
The freeradius-client code is BSD licensed, but I don't like the API.
The libfreeradius-radius code is LGPL'd. It's much better, but it does have the LGPL.
There is a pressing need for a BSD licensed RADIUS library. Too many vendors "roll their own". And get pretty much everything wrong.
What is the (perceived) problem with LGPL? -- John Dennis <jdennis@redhat.com> Looking to carve out IT costs? www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/
On 07/26/2012 09:55 AM, Alan DeKok wrote:
John Dennis wrote:
What is the (perceived) problem with LGPL?
Religious intolerance. :)
I'd rather have a BSD licensed library that's *used* by idiot vendors, than an LGPL'd library they're afraid of.
Can't it be dual licensed then? -- John Dennis <jdennis@redhat.com> Looking to carve out IT costs? www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/
John Dennis wrote:
Can't it be dual licensed then?
I'm loath to dual-license libfreeradius-radius. Part of the reason to have a BSD licensed library is to have *less* functionality than the LGPLd one. A BSD licensed one is usually client-side. A client needs less functionality than a server. e.g. static dictionaries, etc. Alan DeKok.
Hi Alan Thanks a lot for the valuable information. As you mentioned that BSD one is used by most of the vendors. Which one is very popular among vendors? Arvind On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>wrote:
John Dennis wrote:
Can't it be dual licensed then?
I'm loath to dual-license libfreeradius-radius.
Part of the reason to have a BSD licensed library is to have *less* functionality than the LGPLd one. A BSD licensed one is usually client-side. A client needs less functionality than a server.
e.g. static dictionaries, etc.
Alan DeKok. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
-- Arvind Kumar Gupta
Arvind Gupta wrote:
Hi Alan Thanks a lot for the valuable information. As you mentioned that BSD one is used by most of the vendors.
No. A BSD one *should* be used by vendors.
Which one is very popular among vendors?
None, unfortunately. Most vendors seem to write their own. And often get it wrong. Alan DeKok.
participants (3)
-
Alan DeKok -
Arvind Gupta -
John Dennis