(RADIATOR) Radiator vs Freeradius study

[Terry Simons]

Hi Tiago,

We have been using Radiator for over a year now in a production 
University campus environment.  We chose Radiator, at the time, because 
FreeRADIUS didn't have the required EAP type support (TTLS->PAP) that 
we decided to deploy.

I think one of the major benefits of Radiator is that you are 
guaranteed support for the product (because you *DO* have to purchase 
it), but you also get the source code.

Mike and Hugh have been extremely helpful in solving problems for us, 
and in some cases they have had fixes for our bugs in less than 24 
hours.

Originally when we looked at FreeRADIUS, we asked them what plans they 
had for TTLS support, and we were told that if we wanted the 
functionality, we could write it ourselves.  (Standard Open Source 
answer, I suppose. ;-)

At any rate, FreeRADIUS does now support many more EAP types than last 
year when we did our deployment, but I think if I were faced with the 
decision again, I would push my campus to buy Radiator, because it's an 
excellent product, IMO.

I haven't used FreeRADIUS a lot, though, so I can't really speak for 
that side of things.

This may not be relevant to you, but Xsupplicant (the Open Source 
802.1X client for Linux) is primarily tested against Radiator, so if 
you are planning on using Xsupplicant, it has a higher chance of 
working with Radiator, simply because that's what we test against most 
heavily.

- Terry

On Jun 21, 2004, at 3:20 PM, Tiago Fernandes wrote:

> I'am doing a non-fundamentalist study about Radiator versus Freeradius
> (http://www.freeradius.org), costs not-involved, to see what to use at
> work.
>
> I looking for advantages and disadvantages mainly.
>
> In terms of funcionalities, we want to have PEAP and MS-CHAPv2 support.
>
>
> Thanking you in advance,
>
>
> 	Tiago Fernandes

--
Archive at http://www.open.com.au/archives/radiator/
Announcements on radiator-announce at open.com.au
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo at open.com.au' with
'unsubscribe radiator' in the body of the message.