|Anonymous | Login||2023-03-28 01:28 EDT|
|Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap|
|View Issue Details [ Jump to Notes ]||[ Issue History ] [ Print ]|
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0001026||PacketFence||core||public||2010-07-05 13:56||2011-04-13 10:05|
|Priority||normal||Severity||minor||Reproducibility||have not tried|
|Target Version||Fixed in Version||2.1.0|
|Summary||0001026: PacketFence does not handle very well the AutoReg violation in some cases|
|Description||We have a client with a big network and more than 2k VoIP phones plugged on Nortel switches.|
With Nortel switches, we have to manage VoIP phones because PF needs to authorize each phone on a port.
We enabled the Autoreg violation and configured it so that all devices with a a Nortel Phone DHCP fingerprint are automatically registered.
The issue is that everytime a phone renew its IP, PF tries to trigger a violation, which is always closed eventhough the phone is registered.
By looking at the logs and the load on the machine, I realized that this situation/setup results in a non-negligeable useless work overload on the server.
So I'm wondering if, for that particular Autoreg violation, we should not think of a different way to manage things. What is the point of creating a autoreg violation for a device that is already registered ?!?. Should we really use a violation for this ?
I'm still not sure this is an issue though... just throwing ideas in that ticket.
|Tags||No tags attached.|
|fixed in git revision|
|fixed in mtn revision||0e8a2dbb9050898a69fe54542bbae90ccc391101|
|Attached Files||violation-autoreg-only-if-node-not-reg.patch [^] (4,507 bytes) 2011-04-13 10:05 [Show Content]|
edited on: 2011-02-23 16:29
faced a problem today related to this.
autoregistering a node did a VLAN re-evaluation of the switch-port and this had consequences on the phone plugged in or the PC depending on whether a PC was there or not.
Avoiding the violation creation when the node is already reg would solve this and the above performance problem so I'm going through with this.
Violation with action autoreg is only triggered if node is not registered.
|2010-07-05 13:56||rbalzard||New Issue|
|2010-07-28 13:04||obilodeau||Relationship added||related to 0001042|
|2010-11-19 14:25||obilodeau||Target Version||1.10.0 => 2.0.0|
|2011-01-18 09:47||obilodeau||Target Version||2.0.0 => 2.1.0|
|2011-02-23 16:21||obilodeau||Note Added: 0001878|
|2011-02-23 16:22||obilodeau||Reporter||rbalzard => obilodeau|
|2011-02-23 16:22||obilodeau||Assigned To||=> obilodeau|
|2011-02-23 16:22||obilodeau||Status||new => assigned|
|2011-02-23 16:22||obilodeau||Category||performance => core|
|2011-02-23 16:22||obilodeau||Target Version||2.1.0 => 2.0.2|
|2011-02-23 16:29||obilodeau||Note Edited: 0001878|
|2011-02-24 09:25||obilodeau||mtn revision||=> 0e8a2dbb9050898a69fe54542bbae90ccc391101|
|2011-02-24 09:25||obilodeau||Note Added: 0001879|
|2011-02-24 09:25||obilodeau||Status||assigned => resolved|
|2011-02-24 09:25||obilodeau||Fixed in Version||=> 2.0.2|
|2011-02-24 09:25||obilodeau||Resolution||open => fixed|
|2011-03-03 15:20||obilodeau||Fixed in Version||2.0.2 => 2.1.0|
|2011-03-03 15:25||obilodeau||Status||resolved => closed|
|2011-04-13 10:05||obilodeau||File Added: violation-autoreg-only-if-node-not-reg.patch|
|Copyright © 2000 - 2012 MantisBT Group|