Yeah, I might be worrying too much, but my users might find it odd if I
overcharge them. These few seconds could add up to a substantial amount of
time for which they might get billed extra.
Do you mean I only have to specify an AcctDelayTime in RadiusNT to subtract
2 or 3 seconds from the AcctSessionTime ?
Or is the NAS supposed to return AcctDelayTime ?
- Danny
-----Original Message-----
From: Dale E. Reed Jr. <daler@iea-software.com>
To: radiusnt@iea-software.com <radiusnt@iea-software.com>
Date: Saturday, May 30, 1998 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: AcctSessionTime question
>Danny Sinang wrote:
>>
>> Dale,
>>
>> Is AcctSessionTime supposed to be exactly equal to ( Logoff Time - Logon
>> Time ) ?
>
>No. But it should be really close to:
>
>(LogOffTime-AcctDelayTime)-(LogonTime=AcctDelayTime)
>
>AcctSessionTime is authorative from the NAS and is not timestamp
>calculated.
>
>> RRAS's Hotfix 2 was just released
>>
>>
ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/bussys/winnt/winnt-public/fixes/usa/NT40/hotfixes-po
>> stSP3/rras20-fix/ ) and it now returns the AcctSessionTime, but it is
>> sometimes over by 2 seconds ( sometimes 3 seconds ) as compared to the
>> difference between Logoff Time and Logon Time.
>
>Thats really not a big deal. RADIUS accounting packets can
>backup and if you are storing to an Access database, the
>time for the record to get from RRAS, to RadiusNT to Acceess
>(Access being the slowest) could easily be a second or two.
>
>> Do you think its a RRAS bug ? Do other NASes return accurate
>> AcctSessionTime's ?
>
>I think you are worrying to much about it. :)
>
>--
>Dale E. Reed Jr. (daler@iea-software.com)
>_________________________________________________________________
> IEA Software, Inc. | RadiusNT, Emerald, and NT FAQs
> Internet Solutions for Today | http://www.iea-software.com