Subject: acct-stop w/o acct-start

From: "Alper Yegin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 11:31:51 +0300

Hello,

In various networks, acct-start is used to signal the successful start of
the service.

So, even though the Access-Accept was sent by the AAA server, it does not
mark the session as "started" until it also receives an acct-start from the
NAS. Acct-start is sent by the NAS once the host completes the network entry
procedure, including IP address configuration.

And if the network entry does not complete despite the NAS receiving an
access-accept (e.g., host abandoning the procedure, or one of the steps
failing), then the acct-start is not sent to the AAA server. AAA server can
let the session timeout. But an explicit message from the NAS indicating
failure would yield a better resource management on the AAA server side. 

For such a case, is it OK to send an acct-stop without sending an acct-start
after the access-accept?

Or, is there another/better way of using a RADIUS message for this purpose?

Thanks.

Alper

---

From: Alan DeKok <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 10:48:04 +0200

Alper Yegin wrote:
> failing), then the acct-start is not sent to the AAA server. AAA server
> can let the session timeout. But an explicit message from the NAS
> indicating failure would yield a better resource management on the AAA
> server side.

  Similarly, if the session lasts less than a second.  Should the NAS
send a start, immediately followed by a stop?

> For such a case, is it OK to send an acct-stop without sending an
> acct-start after the access-accept?

  People are using it this way in practice.

  It's not forbidden by the specs, but the RADIUS specs are silent on a
large number of topics.

> Or, is there another/better way of using a RADIUS message for this purpose?

  I don't think so, no.

  Alan DeKok.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>