Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 12:57:40 -0400 (EDT) From: "Gary D. Margiotta" <gary@tbe.net> To: mika ruohotie <bsdisp@shadows.aeon.net> Cc: isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: HELP ON: Cisco's, Ascend, Routing, and User Management. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970704124119.25580A-100000@lightning.tbe.net> In-Reply-To: <199707040909.MAA00106@shadows.aeon.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> tac_plus _is_ superrior to any radius i've seen so far. > > and works well on both 2.1-stable and 2.2-stable. > > i have a friend who has/is building a product that's using a database > instead of plain text file for the users file, scales into a huge > systems much more easier... If that does come about I'd like to see how that works... > the only thing in tac_plus i dont like is the fact it requires cisco > hardware... > > actually, while i comment, i'm getting between rock and the hard place in > thinking which to use, pm3 or as5200, the fact i could use tac_plus with > the as5200 makes it _very_ tempting box... but then again... Well, IMHO, the Cisco is far superior to the PM3 from what I've seen and read. The 2501 engine it is built around is built to work. The PM3's are still quite buggy and people are having trouble getting or staying connected in a lot of cases. You get what you pay for (in the hardware market at least), and it is kinda unfortunate, but the amount of R&D that has gone into the Cisco as compared to the PM3's lends the Cisco to be much better developed. I was going to get a PM3, but after being on their mailing lists, and after meeting with a Cisco rep and seeing the comparisons and reading the specs, there was no need to think before making that decision. -Gary Margiotta TBE Internet Services http://www.tbe.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.970704124119.25580A-100000>