Duplicating Accounting Requests / accounting to multiple locations

[Alan DeKok]

Florian Lohoff wrote:
> For most of my purposes i dont care about systems not available for a longer
> period as backend systems take care on synchronisation.

  Then why replicate via RADIUS?  Why not synchronise via the backend?

> In the past 15 years i have seen a lot of broken Radius implementations not
> sending Stop/Start or Accounting On/Off so relying on state by Radius is some
> kind of guesswork in my eyes.

  Yes.

> When talking about reliability you talk about fsync after every packet before
> acknowledge? 

  No.  The detail module doesn't fsync to disk.  But it does do it's
"best effort" to write to disk.

> Store and Forward for Mails is okay - but doing that with some 2000 Packets
> per seconds sounds wrong.

  So submit a patch which implements accounting replication which (a)
doesn't write to disk, and (b) is robust in the event of temporary
process/system failures.

  I don't think you can satisfy both requirements at the same time.
What you CAN do is to bypass the detail file most of the time.  See
raddb/sites-available/robust-proxy-accounting

  Alan DeKok.