I had the unfortunate experience for my radius daemon to die when it couldn't resolve one client in clients.conf Is there any particular reason for radius not to spew out error message to the logs and declare the client "dead" or "unresolvable " and continue to function or is this just bad programming.... Best regards Johann B. -- Jóhann B. Guðmundsson. RHCE,CCSA Unix Kerfistjóri. Kerfistjórn. Reiknistofnun Háskóla Íslands. Tæknigarði, Dunhaga 5. Rafpóstur: johannbg@hi.is 107 Reykjavík. Sími: 525-4267 Ísland. Bréfasími: 552-8801 Johann B. Gudmundsson. RHCE,CCSA Unix System Engineer. IT Management. Reiknistofnun University of Iceland. Taeknigardi, Dunhaga 5. Email: johannbg@hi.is IS-107 Reykjavik. Phone: +354-525-4267 Iceland. Fax: +354-552-8801
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
I had the unfortunate experience for my radius daemon to die when it couldn't resolve one client in clients.conf
Yes. The answer is to not use DNS names for clients. Use IP addresses.
Is there any particular reason for radius not to spew out error message to the logs and declare the client "dead" or "unresolvable " and continue to function or is this just bad programming....
It's intentional. It indicates that your configuration is bad or broken. The alternative is to start up without the unresolvable client. This list would then contain complaints from people that "the client is up, but the server says it's unknown"... when DNS is down. i.e. you can't please everyone all of the time. If you don't like the behavior of the software, change it. That's why you have source. Bad-mouthing the designers of a program because you don't understand the full implications of a design choice is a less useful choice than just fixing behavior you don't like. Alan DeKok. -- http://deployingradius.com - The web site of the book http://deployingradius.com/blog/ - The blog
Alan DeKok wrote:
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
I had the unfortunate experience for my radius daemon to die when it couldn't resolve one client in clients.conf
Yes. The answer is to not use DNS names for clients. Use IP addresses.
Or list them in /etc/hosts -- Dennis Skinner Systems Administrator BlueFrog Internet http://www.bluefrog.com
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Dennis Skinner
Or list them in /etc/hosts
Wouldnt recommend it...
If you are obsessed with using names instead of IP's in the clients.conf file and you don't want to depend on DNS, this is your other option. It may be beneficial for some people. For instance, if several services talk to the NAS's (radius, tacacs, snmp checks, etc) and the NAS's change IP's for some reason, then you only need to update the one file (and probably HUP at least radius). *shrug* Optimal, no, but an option. -- Dennis Skinner Systems Administrator BlueFrog Internet http://www.bluefrog.com
Alan DeKok.
Yes. The answer is to not use DNS names for clients. Use IP addresses.
True if the radiusd daemon doesnt die if cant reach the IP addresses :) Will test it tomorrow when I get back to work, and switch immidiedly if that's the case. If not then it's just bind on a *nix platform vs cisco or some other hardware.. which one would you bet on... :) Me..
Is there any particular reason for radius not to spew out error message to the logs and declare the client "dead" or "unresolvable "
Alan DeKok.
It's intentional. It indicates that your configuration is bad or broken.
What I had expected, there is a reason for it...
and continue to function or is this just bad programming....
Sarcastic remark... Others can do it to Alan.. Alan DeKok.
i.e. you can't please everyone all of the time.
Question about keeping some function up and running vs non at all. a.k.a 500 angry users vs 1 sysadmin who cant read/understand what radiusd is telling him.. Personally I would go for the sysadmin Me and angry mob not a good idea... Alan DeKok.
If you don't like the behavior of the software, change it. That's why you have source. Bad-mouthing the designers of a program because you don't untderstand the full implications of a design choice is a less useful choice than just fixing behavior you don't like.
Alan DeKok.
If I could I would but, freeradius would be last on my list in open source to start "playing with" since it's such good program :) Bad mouthing users of the program couse they dont fully understand the functionality of the program is not a good philosophy either Alan.. User =! Developers so dont expect them to think like one.. Better, more informative documentation would help in that area. Having high expectations about your book Alan, those things that you have publist of it so far have cleared much more for me about freeradius then any other document that is out there.. When you have finished writing it I quess 90% of all the question on this list will vanish. Best Regards Johann B. Ps will it be released in hardcover..
participants (4)
-
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" -
Alan DeKok -
Dennis Skinner -
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson