[Wifidog] Version 1.0

Benoit Grégoire bock at step.polymtl.ca
Thu Apr 22 09:49:36 EDT 2004

Hash: SHA1

> I think the entire code for userclasses is not needed anymore and I will
> remove it from CVS, but keep a diff of it in case I was wrong and we need
> it, but as talked with Daniel Drouet and Benoit, I believe the goal is to
> have hotspot owners customize what they want on the AUTH server and not on
> the router, so no custom configuration on the router.

That is NOT what I said!  We will definitely need userclasses later on, and I 
really, really don't feel like having to build a centralised architecture 
where everyone has to go to the central server to admin their own router, ala 
LocusWorld or MandrakeClub.

What I did say is that for version 1.0 we can cheat a little:  after the 
account is locked out, instead of returning the result: YES, 
NEW_ACCOUNT_LOCKED and having the gateway decide what to do with it, we can 

A note about YES/NO:  In my opinion, yes means that authentication was 
successfull, not necessary that the user must be granted internet access.  
The user classes should have a well documented meaning, and the gateway 
should take final decisions based on them.  

Here is an extreme example:  Say we lock out an account for abuse, and that 
person also owns a HotSpot (ok, I admit, it's unlikely).  He logs in at home, 
is listed as the owner in the config file.  Now obviously the server should 
answer:  YES, KNOWN_NETWORK_ABUSER, or something like that, not NO, 
KNOWN_NETWORK_ABUSER.  Otherwise, the hotspot has no way to know if he simply 
entered a wrong password, and should be denied access. 
- -- 
Benoit Grégoire, http://step.polymtl.ca/~bock/
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)


Wifidog mailing list
Wifidog at isf.waglo.com

More information about the Wifidog mailing list