Poll of opinions for new keyword
Alan DeKok
aland at deployingradius.com
Thu Sep 7 18:47:35 CEST 2017
On Sep 7, 2017, at 9:36 AM, Winfield, Alister <Alister.Winfield at sky.uk> wrote:
> recv Access-Request {
> subrequest dhcp {
Hmm... putting the protocol there is a reasonable choice.
But... the issue is we also need to run the DHCP state machine:
recv foo {
}
send foo {
}
etc. The idea is that *all* DHCP packets undergo the same processing. Which avoids the weird issues we have in v3 with inner-tunnel sometimes not being the same as the default server.
> update request {
> Request-Packet-Type := Discover
> }
> dhcp
That's better done via Matthew's suggestion:
call server.Packet
> Nicely represents the intent of the author of the configuration. I assume that the update there could add values from the parent request into related DHCP attributes.
Yes.
> It is also obvious that straight RADIUS proxy is trivial to write in that form without any special magic. Something like this would be really obvious to even a first time reader of a freeRADIUS configuration.
Yes.
Alan DeKok.
More information about the Freeradius-Users
mailing list