Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 00:31:27 +0100 From: Josef Karthauser <joe@pavilion.net> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> Cc: Doug <Doug@gorean.org>, "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@FreeBSD.ORG>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc services Message-ID: <19990701003127.B26123@pavilion.net> In-Reply-To: <74394.930775050@zippy.cdrom.com>; from Jordan K. Hubbard on Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 01:37:30PM -0700 References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9906301310500.2203-100000@dt054n86.san.rr.com> <74394.930775050@zippy.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 01:37:30PM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > radius 1812/tcp RADIUS > > radius 1812/udp RADIUS > > Actually, they didn't claim that 1812/1813 were the bogus numbers, > they claimed that the quoted RFCs were bogus. In any case, I think > this is a firm case of a defacto standard colliding with an official > one and not so much a matter of "right" and "wrong" in any truly > boolean sense. I'd still like to hear more about who uses the new > assignments as defaults - so far I've checked the defaults on our > local cisco 2501 and Livingston PM2er [ick] and they both use > 1645/1646. Any ISP plugging along with the defaults on that equipment > is going to hit a wall with a radius that has gotten its port > assignments properly through /etc/services and that's just bogus > too. Come on guys... why the discussion now? The change was made in Feb. If there were problems they should have been mentioned _then_. Leave them on the RFC ports (1812 & 1813). [We changed over to the 18xx numbers on our dial network and firewalls last October] 1.42 Sun Feb 22 6:28:47 1998 UTC by julian Add a few useful entries (e.g. radius) ------------------------------------------- 1.48 Sat May 23 7:52:17 1998 UTC by phk RADIUS was originally coded to use ports 1645 (radius) and 1646 (radacct), but RFC's 2138 and 2139 define new ports for RADIUS and RADIUS accounting, namely 1812 and 1813 respectively. FreeBSD 2.2.6 uses the old radacct port, but the new radius port, which is a bit silly. ------------------------------------------- 1.57 Wed Jun 30 6:11:14 1999 UTC by jkh Put radius on its proper ports. > I could certainly live with (and even enthusiastically support) such a > compromise. Perhaps the 1812/1813 entries still in there but > commented out with a notation as to why, along with uncommented > 1645/1646 entries which also point to the other entries as the > "official but not often used" ones? Would that make you and Rod > happy? :-) It wouldn't make me happy! :) Joe -- Josef Karthauser FreeBSD: How many times have you booted today? Technical Manager Viagra for your server (http://www.uk.freebsd.org) Pavilion Internet plc. [joe@pavilion.net, joe@uk.freebsd.org, joe@tao.org.uk] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990701003127.B26123>