Backporting rlm_rest to 2.1.x
gavin.alves at gmail.com
Sat Aug 11 10:27:32 CEST 2012
Thanks Alan. Pretty much the answer I was expecting but not the one I was
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 deployingradius.com> 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...
More information about the Freeradius-Devel