Backporting rlm_rest to 2.1.x

Gavin Alves gavin.alves at
Sat Aug 11 10:27:32 CEST 2012

Thanks Alan.  Pretty much the answer I was expecting but not the one I was
hoping for.

3.0 is not mature enough for my requirements, especially as you say there
are significant architectural changes.

I've decided to try initiating the http requests using rlm_perl, which as I
understand it, should have no significant overhead insofar as the
interpreter is concerned.  The only downside I see is that it will not be
possible to reuse the curl connections.  However this is compensated for by
the ability to design requests in a high level language.

Please shoot me down if this is a terrible idea.

On 11 August 2012 07:19, Alan DeKok <aland at> wrote:

> Gavin Alves wrote:
> > Can someone kindly give me some hints for getting rlm_rest working with
> > freeradius 2.1.
>   Don't.  The internal APIs and data structures have changed a LOT from
> 2.x to 3.0.  Back-porting a module really means re-writing it from scratch.
>   Why not just run 3.0?
> > Now I get the error below which I can't make head nor tail of.  Is 3.0
> > using different compiler options or something?
>   3.0 has data structures, functions, and other things that don't exist
> in 2.1.  You can't just copy the module.  You have to copy every single
> thing it depends on.
>   Or, just use 3.0.
>   Alan DeKok.
> -
> List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Freeradius-Devel mailing list