Hi there, I'm graphing the stats of the configured clients we have. Currently I use something like <snip> echo "Message-Authenticator = 0x00, FreeRADIUS-Statistics-Type = 35, FreeRADIUS-Stats-Client-Number = 21" | radclient 127.0.0.1:18120 status veryverysecret </snip> to retrive them.That works out fine. What I now miss is a way to actually get a list of clients, either the number (Stats-Client-Number), or even better a list of ips. Is it somehow possible to also get the number of clients via the server status? Or is there another possibility, besides parsing the config file. Thanks in advance, Bernhard
Hi,
Hi there,
I'm graphing the stats of the configured clients we have.
Currently I use something like
<snip> echo "Message-Authenticator = 0x00, FreeRADIUS-Statistics-Type = 35, FreeRADIUS-Stats-Client-Number = 21" | radclient 127.0.0.1:18120 status veryverysecret </snip>
to retrive them.That works out fine.
What I now miss is a way to actually get a list of clients, either the number (Stats-Client-Number), or even better a list of ips.
Is it somehow possible to also get the number of clients via the server status? Or is there another possibility, besides parsing the config file.
with 2.1.1 you can do radmin -e 'show client list' | wc -l ..and far far more than just that noddy example alan
Hi Alan, thanks for your quick reply ;). A.L.M.Buxey@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
with 2.1.1 you can do
radmin -e 'show client list' | wc -l
..and far far more than just that noddy example Really ice, haven't seen radmin yet. Do you know how stable it is? - The example config file for the control listener states that it shouldn't be used in a production environment.
Bye, Bernhard
Bernhard Miklautz wrote:
Really ice, haven't seen radmin yet. Do you know how stable it is? - The example config file for the control listener states that it shouldn't be used in a production environment.
I've done some simple tests on in. It looks to be OK. The warnings are there because it hasn't been tested in a wide variety of environments. There are no known bugs or problems with using it. Alan DeKok.
Hi,
Really ice, haven't seen radmin yet. Do you know how stable it is? - The example config file for the control listener states that it shouldn't be used in a production environment.
2.1.1 stability? far far more than any other 2.0.x release from experience here - hence its being used in production. so many fixes I wonder sometimes how we got away with 2.0.5 alan
A.L.M.Buxey@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
2.1.1 stability? far far more than any other 2.0.x release from experience here - hence its being used in production. so many fixes I wonder sometimes how we got away with 2.0.5
Ouch. OK. Git seems to be working well, so I think we can create a "stable" branch in git that's 2.1.1, plus any fixes that have gone in since then. The rest of the changes (i.e. moving socket code to plug-in modules) can go into a "2.2" branch. This should hopefully minimize any issues with finding bugs at the last minute, or after the release has been made. Alan DeKok.
Hi,
here - hence its being used in production. so many fixes I wonder sometimes how we got away with 2.0.5
Ouch.
;-) I hope you didnt take that the wrong way - I was impressed with 2.0.5 - but 2.1.1 is a great piece of work and I would recommend people to give it a go. certainly we cannot find any issues without enough users :-)
OK. Git seems to be working well, so I think we can create a "stable" branch in git that's 2.1.1, plus any fixes that have gone in since then.
..so this would evolve into 2.1.2 etc at perticular times...
The rest of the changes (i.e. moving socket code to plug-in modules) can go into a "2.2" branch.
..the bleeding edge. makes sense
This should hopefully minimize any issues with finding bugs at the last minute, or after the release has been made.
its those pesky little niggly things that crop after after the release - they've been lurking around each release for a while now. could almost guarantee that the second 2.0.x or 2.1.x was released on the web server, there'd be a little quirk or thing wrong that was so facile or trivial. anyway, enough eyes on the release candidates and we'll be sorted :-) alan
participants (3)
-
A.L.M.Buxey＠lboro.ac.uk -
Alan DeKok -
Bernhard Miklautz