help-gnu-radius
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Help-gnu-radius] RE: Radius 1.1 3COM/USR support


From: Azzopardi Konrad
Subject: RE: [Help-gnu-radius] RE: Radius 1.1 3COM/USR support
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:29:32 +0200

Dear Andrea,

Attached please find two traces. 3com_radius.eth is a trace showing what
I would like to achieve. gnu.eth is a trace for the gnu radius.

Specifically please look at 3com_radius.eth packet no.2 {Access
Response}. One vendor specific packet with attribute 0x9024 is composed
like this :

1a 12 00 00 01 ad 00 00 90 24 77 61 70 70 6f 6f 6c 31

1 byte for Attribute (1a)
1 byte for Attribute length {12}
4 bytes for Vendor Code (00 00 01 ad)
4 bytes for Vendor attribute {00 00 90 24}
8 bytes for string {77 61 70 70 6f 6f 6c 31}

The above is correct and it is what I want to achieve with my gnu radius
but look what's happening in gnu.eth packet 2. I am sending this
attribute via a script.

1a 10 00 00 01 ad 24 0a 77 61 70 70 6f 6f 6c 31

1 byte for Attribute (1a)
1 byte for Attribute length {10}
4 bytes for Vendor Code (00 00 01 ad)
1 byte for Vendor attribute (24)
1 byte for Vendor attribute value length (0a)
8 bytes for string {77 61 70 70 6f 6f 6c 31}

Clearly the traces are different and since the latter is constructed
according to standard and not to 3com standard clearly the 3com client
will not understand the message.

Is there a way how to make gnu radius compose the packet according to
3Com standard.

Regards

Konrad Azzopardi  B.Eng(Hons)
System Engineer


-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Mistrali [mailto:address@hidden 
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 6:18 PM
To: Azzopardi Konrad
Cc: address@hidden
Subject: Re: [Help-gnu-radius] RE: Radius 1.1 3COM/USR support

Il giorno 29/09/2003 Azzopardi Konrad ha scritto:

>  
> Dear all,
>  
> I have an urgent problem and from a previous version of gnu radius I
> know there was a problem with vendor specific attributes from vendor
> 3vcom/usr {V429}. Now I have the same problem with version 1.1. I did
a
> trace with ethereal and it seems the problem is with the Vendor
> attribute field which is not being sent as 4 bytes. Can someone help ?
>  
> Rgds
>  

Can you send me the trace you got form ethereal? I mean the binary dump,
plz?

A.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]