Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 11:01:57 -0500 From: Ryugen@palaver.org (Ryugen C. Fisher) To: "Troy Settle" <troy@picus.com> Cc: "Dan Harnett" <danh@wzrd.com>, "Corey Ralph" <corey@net-tech.com.au>, <freebsd-isp@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Using radius to NT server? Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20000531110133.00a9c310@mail.palaver.org> In-Reply-To: <NIEBLEDADLBOBAJFKPHDGEFKCAAA.troy@picus.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20000531101912.00a98a10@mail.palaver.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ah... I probably need a firmware upgrade... I can't remember if Lucent was AT&T's child at the time they bought Livingston and Ascend, or whether they were split before the purchase(s).. thanks you all for the update on why the ports were changed... At 10:33 AM 5/31/00, Troy Settle wrote: >** IIRC the port 1645 for Radius is the port that is used by Livingston for >** there Portmaster Routers, etc. Livingston (now a div of AT&T) is > >Livingston was borged by Lucent, not AT&T. Lucent was spun from AT&T after >the breakup (IIRC). > >** the shop >** where Radius was first drafted, written and implemented. As a >** result most >** "older" radius software and hardware use the 1645 port... I >** have not read >** the RFC and would frankly be curious as to how the port got changed from >** the "factory' spec to port 1812. > >Livingston used 1645/1646 because they thought those ports were availiable. >In reality, those ports were reserved for some obscure service. When the >IETF(?) got ahold of the Radius RFC, they found a pair of ports more >suitable for the application. 1812/1813. > >-Troy Ryugen, that "Old Frog" hisself Ryugen@palaver.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.1.2.20000531110133.00a9c310>