Session-Timeout anomalies

[Alan DeKok]

Bill Isaacs wrote:
>  Again Alan, read between the lines.  I've been scanning these emails
> from this group for about year through google searches.
> What I've learned from this mailing list is that you routinely castigate
> people who ask questions on here.  That's rude.  Your tone is arrogant. 
> And that's rude.
> Yes, I'm being condescending but it's in order to point out your
> rudeness -- hopefully in an entertaining way.  You're apparently a
> hopeless case where that's concerned.
> 
> What it seems to me that this thread needs is a set of discussions that
> don't include a staple diet of questioner-castigation, as you've done
> here to me. OF course I expected it, even counted on it, to make the
> point I'm making here.  No one is being led down the wrong path.  You
> just need to lighten up and be a little less arrogant.  A little nicer. 
> A human being.
> 
> And the whole thing sailed right over your arrogant head.  Read this
> exchange, and I rest my case right there.
> 
> I'm trying to make this fun, and be worthwhile as a
> thread.  So caaalm down.  ok?  I'll post the debug output along with
> what it reveals as soon as I've worked it all out thoroughly.  Trust me.  :)
> 
>>   That is completely the wrong approach.  You are misleading everyone
>> else by suggesting that method.
>>
>>   Stop it.
>>
>>> Now *there* is a wholly useful piece of information.  Bravo!  Sooner or
>>> later, we'll clear out enough of the rants to expose goodies, no?  :D
>>   I figured that it was hopeless to get you to follow the existing
>> documentation.  So maybe if I spoon-fed it to you in pieces you might
>> think about it, and follow instructions.
> By the way Alan, I didn't need that spoon fed to me.  I'm drawing out
> information for the benefit of others and frankly, just seeing if you
> have anything in your repertoire that doesn't include trying to belittle
> people who are asking for help.  Jury is still out on that one, but
> wearing a frown as they deliberate.  :) 
> 
> 
> Now for the useful stuff. 
> Here is the telling part of the freeradius -X output that I ran earlier
> this morning and printed out to use as a reference in my inquiries:
> 
> [accessperiod]     expand: %{sql:SELECT
> IF(COUNT(radacctid>=1),(UNIX_TIMESTAMP() -
> IFNULL(UNIX_TIMESTAMP(AcctStartTime),0)),0) FROM radacct WHERE UserName
> = 'cgitest' AND AcctSessionTime >= 1 ORDER BY AcctStartTime LIMIT 1} ->
> 231238
> rlm_sqlcounter: Check item is greater than query result
> rlm_sqlcounter: Authorized user cgitest, check_item=2592000, counter=231238
> rlm_sqlcounter: Sent Reply-Item for user cgitest, Type=*Session-Timeout,
> value=2360762*
> ++[accessperiod] returns ok
> 
> So, there's something fishy with the rlm_sqlcounter module.  Looks like
> the place to start.
> 
> Stay tuned, film at 11.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> -
> List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html