> Read "if you're too lazy to do things the *right* way"
> I agree with earlier posts - I wouldn't want to see the hack job of
> turning a mail protocol into an authentication protocol included in
> the distribution. That would suggest this is an acceptable practice
> for production, when I think anybody in their right mind wouldn't do
> nor recommend this.
Don't piss on the idea when there isn't a better alternative... ;-)
Dinesh prefers a minimal built in user DB (16 users) which is not at all
comparable to existing commercial products (D-Link DSA-3100 for example).
Setting up Radius and maintaining a user database is an Effort (not
currently documented in our doc project yet) and setting up IAS for 2000 /
2003 Windows server is another Effort (note the capital E's on effort - it
isn't an easy task, and a lot of the point to mono was ease of use for the
Even if those two services ARE documented here, they require resources and
hardware that MAY be beyond the access of a LARGE percentage of potential
Any of those users (though they may not be able to access their ISP's radius
service) could access their POP service or IMAP service... or LDAP service
or http auth service?
No one wants radius IN mono, no one wants a comparable authentication and
accounting database such as may be found in comparable WISP products, so why
prevent people from using available tools? Just because it isn't the
prefered method doesn't mean it's dangerous / inexcusable.
You have to remember that many people who use this software have MINIMAL
hard core unix experience. They are following directions to write a CF on
their PC or MAC, buying a soekris box or imaging the drive of an OLD pc, and
starting out. Don't make it impossible for people to work with us?
Just one man's opinion (who is using radius and working on IAS ;-)