The Ascend code sucks about as much as the Livingston code it was derived
from, but there are ALOT of changes and its a VERY different animal.
Maybe you should take a peek at it.
At least Ascend's radius implementation isn't as broken as Livingstons.
(Don't feel too bad, USR's derived version is even worse.)
> time into 2.0 and developing things like menuing which no other server has
> and we're not willing to just give that away to competitors. The license
> is very open where the users are concerned, there really isn't a difference
> where Livingston users are concerned.
I see valid reason for concern, but not the extent that would cause
Livingston to restrict their code.
> It is bad enough that other companies are hyping RADIUS as the greatest
> thing to come along for comm servers - and conveniently forgetting to mention
> it isn't their invention.
Script started on Mon Sep 23 05:18:16 1996
[sasami]:/usr/local/src/radius/radius-960528/radius-1.16-ascend/ascendd>
grep -c Livingston *
acct.c:6
attrprint.c:6
builddbm.c:6
cache.c:0
cache.h:0
cexample.c:0
conf.h:5
des.c:0
des.h:0
dict.c:6
filters.c:0
Makefile:0
md5.c:0
md5.h:0
protos.h:0
radius.h:8
radiusd.c:6
radpass.c:6
users.c:6
usr_read.c:5
util.c:6
version.c:6
[sasami]:/usr/local/src/radius/radius-960528/radius-1.16-ascend/ascendd>
exit
Script done on Mon Sep 23 05:18:33 1996
*yawn* Yea, sure. Ok. They just didn't mention you guys at all.
Oh, and do mind the black helicopters that watch you as you drive to
work every day.
Have a good one.
| Matthew N. Dodd | winter@jurai.net | http://www.jurai.net/~winter |
| Technical Manager | mdodd@intersurf.net | http://www.intersurf.net |
| InterSurf Online | "Welcome to the net Sir, would you like a handbasket?"|