a.cudbardb at freeradius.org
Thu Aug 14 19:15:00 CEST 2014
On 14 Aug 2014, at 08:54, Kev Pearce <email.me at kevp.com> wrote:
>> That constraint is still there in v3.0.x. Why would you want to add a
> client that doesn't match the src IP address of the packet you just
> Because the NASes will be NATted over the internet, the real IP might be a
> private RFC1918 address, but the source IP address will be a public IP.
> Multiple NASes would be seen as the same public IP address but have their
> own NAS-IP-Address values.
In the brave new world of SaaS and the clouded solutions people should
probably be badgering the ISPs that provide backhaul for their hotspots
to be providing an IPv6 service.
IPv4 NAT in this context is generally a hack, and I think not enabling
those who use it is probably a positive thing for the IT community as
a whole :).
Arran Cudbard-Bell <a.cudbardb at freeradius.org>
FreeRADIUS development team
FD31 3077 42EC 7FCD 32FE 5EE2 56CF 27F9 30A8 CAA2
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 881 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
More information about the Freeradius-Users