Captive portal's session timeout

sullrich

Could be. I don't know. Will check it out.

lir

Cool.
Let me know what you find out…

sullrich

We havent changed RELENG_1's captive portal code in quite a while. That is not it.

lir

Sorry but I'm a bit confused.
Is the 'session-timeout' attribute supported or not?

sullrich

Session timeout is working fine for me here. But I am in no way using radius.

lir

Right.
When not using radius, it's working fine.

Question is - what happens when using radius?
There's a special box to use Session-Timeout attribute received from the radius so why is that not functioning?

Thanks.

lir

@sullrich:

Could be. I don't know. Will check it out.

Any new regarding this issue?

Thanks.

sullrich

No.

buraglio

@sullrich:

No.

I've been too busy to test this yet, sorry. I have a lot of travel in the next few weeks so it may be a little while.

nb

hoba

You might want to test this with m0n0wall and bring this to attention at the m0n0 list if it's the same there. pfSense's captive portal is a nearly exact copy of the m0n0 CP though it's not the version used in the latest m0n0wall.

namezero

Looks like m0n0wall's beta 1.23b1 has improvement on that issue:

hanges in captive portal (jdegraeve)

* fixed a bug in the way we handle authentication mechanisms (potentially allowing double logins and faulty locking)
* add support for different MAC address formatting styles
* add support for per-user bandwidth limitation (using well-known WISPr RADIUS attributes)
http://m0n0.ch/wall/beta.php

So if you're really stuck, you might want to take a look at m0n0wall for the mean time.

sullrich

@namezero:

Looks like m0n0wall's beta 1.23b1 has improvement on that issue:

hanges in captive portal (jdegraeve)

* fixed a bug in the way we handle authentication mechanisms (potentially allowing double logins and faulty locking)
* add support for different MAC address formatting styles
* add support for per-user bandwidth limitation (using well-known WISPr RADIUS attributes)
http://m0n0.ch/wall/beta.php

So if you're really stuck, you might want to take a look at m0n0wall for the mean time.

We have already backported this code to HEAD but it will not appear in 1.0. I agree with namezero, if this is such a big issue then please run m0n0wall.