Re: Here's a stupid one.

Dan Waldron ( (no email) )
Fri, 12 Jun 1998 06:09:18 +1000

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01BD95C8.A291BDA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks for that Jeff. I thought the resolution was that CALs weren't =
needed if one was only using TCP/IP? I remember this discussion on the =
list about 18 months ago. Is RADIUS an expensive option, or is it =
difficult to administer? Any idea on how it integrates with Virtual =
Motion's Remote Access Manager?

Rgds
Dan

-------------------------------------------
Dan Waldron
Diversified Data
dan@diversified.com.au
http://www.diversified.com.au
Ph: 0417-659-828 (+61-417-659-828)
Fx: 02-9832-0951 (+61-2-9832-0951)

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Woods <jwoods@delta.com>
To: ntisp@iea-software.com <ntisp@iea-software.com>
Date: Thursday, 11 June 1998 23:11
Subject: Re: Here's a stupid one.
=20
=20
Users don't have to log onto NT's DOMAIN to gain Internet access, =
for one. If you have 100 phone lines coming in, your NT servers have to =
have at least 100 client licenses, plus enough for shares. With RADIUS, =
they're never logging onto the NT box proper -- just to the Internet =
service you provide, via RADIUS.
=20
At 10:50 PM 6/11/98 +1000, you wrote:=20
>>>>
=20
This may seem a rather elementary question, but, why would I =
want to use RADIUS authentication of users as opposed to NT's user =
authentiation? I'm not using a router, I'm using NT's inbuilt router =
capabilities, which have been working well for me for two years now so I =
have yet to be convinced on changing. Perhaps there are some major =
benefits that I do not yet know about? Rgds Dan size=3D2>
-------------------------------------------
Dan Waldron
Diversified Data
dan@diversified.com.au
http://www.diversified.com.au
Ph: 0417-659-828 (+61-417-659-828)
Fx: 02-9832-0951 (+61-2-9832-0951)
=20
=20
=20
=20

------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01BD95C8.A291BDA0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">

Thanks for that Jeff. I thought the =resolution=20was that CALs weren't needed if one was only using TCP/IP? I remember =this=20discussion on the list about 18 months ago. Is RADIUS an expensive =option, or is=20it difficult to administer? Any idea on how it integrates with Virtual =Motion's=20Remote Access Manager?
 
Rgds
Dan

-------------------------------------------
Dan=20Waldron
Diversified Data
dan@diversified.com.au
http://www.diversified.com.au<=BR>Ph:=200417-659-828 (+61-417-659-828)
Fx: 02-9832-0951=20(+61-2-9832-0951)
-----Original =Message-----
From:=20 Jeff Woods <jwoods@delta.com>
To: =ntisp@iea-software.com =<ntisp@iea-software.com>
=Date:=20 Thursday, 11 June 1998 23:11
Subject: Re: Here's a =stupid=20 one.

Users don't have to log onto NT's DOMAIN to =gain=20 Internet access, for one. If you have 100 phone lines coming in, =your NT=20 servers have to have at least 100 client licenses, plus enough for =shares.=20 With RADIUS, they're never logging onto the NT box proper -- just to =the=20 Internet service you provide, via RADIUS.

At 10:50 PM 6/11/98 =+1000,=20 you wrote:
>>>>
This may seem a rather elementary question, =but,=20 why would I want to use RADIUS authentication of users as =opposed to=20 NT's user authentiation? I'm not using a router, I'm using NT's =inbuilt=20 router capabilities, which have been working well for me for two =years=20 now so I have yet to be convinced on =changing.=20 Perhaps there are some major benefits that I do not yet know =about? Rgds Dan=20 =size=3D2>
-------------------------------------------
Dan=20 Waldron
Diversified=20 =Data
dan@diversified.com.au
http://www.diversified.com.au
Ph:=20 0417-659-828 (+61-417-659-828)
Fx: 02-9832-0951=20 =(+61-2-9832-0951)



=------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01BD95C8.A291BDA0--