Re: Y2K and Radius: maExpireDate above 12-31-1999 (year 2000)

Mike Miller ( michael@abraxis.com )
Mon, 27 Jul 1998 11:23:25 -0400

Yes, the 2050 thing was verified in SQL as 2050. As for the saExpireDate,
I have not tested the saExpireDates yet, only the maExpireDate. Right now
we don't actually use the saExpireDate's here.. just leave them null. I
suppose if there is an issue with the saExpire it would be good to know,
just in case we should decide to begin using it.

At 03:48 PM 7/25/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Yes, 8 digit dates take care of it once and for all. I just wanted to point
>out SQL Server's default behavior for 6 digit dates. If you're curious,
>paste the following SQL into ISQL and execute it and you'll see exactly what
>I'm talking about.
>
>select convert(datetime, '12/31/49')
>select convert(datetime, '1/1/50')
>
>The first select returns Dec 31 2049 12:00AM
>The second one returns Jan 1 1950 12:00AM
>
>I'm very comfortable with 2.5's Y2K compliance. I did notice in 2.2 that if
>I put in an saExpireDate >= 1/1/2000 authentication would think that the
>account was expired, but no problem in 2.5.
>
>

===================================================
= /\ Mike A. Miller =
= /--\ \/ Abraxis Networks =
=/ \ B R A /\ I S =
= / =
= N E T W O R K S michael@abraxis.com=
===================================================