The relationship between the campus network billing system and Authentication Gateway is a core architecture decision that affects the stability of the entire network. Many projects go online, and there are traceable sources in this place.
Co-ordinated: one set of equipment is done, but risk concentration
A tight-coupled scheme, where the billing module is embedded in Authentication Gateway. The typical pattern is a braS or Authentication Gateway, which is both Portal/802.1X certification and fee strategy execution and bill generation."Integrated Gateway"。
The benefits are clear: simple deployment, one set of equipment, one set of configuration interfaces, and no two systems for the transporter. Small campus networks (for example, middle-school schools with less than 1,000 people) have a problem using this program, with small failure and low allocation workload.
The bad side is that the costing logic and authentication logic move together on the same device, while upgrading the solid with a concentration of risk. And the change in the billing strategy requires restarting the certification service or rebooting the equipment, which has an impact on network availability. If the billing module comes out of bugs, the authentication will also be affected.——Students do not have access to the Internet, not because certification is a problem but because of the collapse of the billing module.
Co-condulation: independent service plus standard agreement, high flexibility
The pine-coupled scheme, Authentication Gateway (BRAS/AC/Portal gateway) is responsible only for access authentication and charges run on another server as an independent service.——The most common are the reports of Radius (Accounding-Request/Response) and REST API.
The benefits of this structure are that they will be upgraded independently and without prejudice to each other. NATSHEL_AUTH_GATEWAY for solids, fee-free services; significant adjustment in billing strategy, Authentication Gateway not feeling.——Billing service servers, certification can also work (depending on the specific configuration, some of which can be configured)"Allow release when billing fails"）。
The bad is that the capacity of a carrier is high. You need to understand the interaction between the two systems, read Radius's report, and know the logic of REST API. If there is only one person in the crew, and this person has no understanding at protocol level, the loose coupling structure increases the difficulty of trouble-shooting.
How to choose: size and capability of the campus
A network of less than 1,000 people usually uses a tight coupling. For reasons such as small size, relatively simple billing strategy (basically monthly or flow-based) and low failure impact. And these schools are often not dedicated to the net, but closely integrated."A set of equipment is done."More in line with actual capacity for transportation.
The campus network of 1,000 or more people suggests a pine-up. When it's big, the complexity of the billing strategy will be one step.——There may be a combination of free teaching staff, students' set-to-show fees, temporary visitor codes and multi-operator dialling. These things are in Authentication Gateway, which is very poorly configured. Independent billing services can be clear and modular.
There is another dimension: there is no need for multiple operators to provide. If schools work with many operators, students can choose to go to telecommunications or connections, and the billing system needs to move from the corresponding operator's Bras.——NATHHELL_AUTH_GATEWAY: Identification, fee-based services are selected for routers based on the package.
Three questions to be asked when choosing a model.
Whatever the manufacturer's campaign, the selection is clear on three questions:
First, is the billing module a tight-coated or a loose-coupled one?"We're both in favor of both."Let him show the difference between the two options, not just to hear about publicity.
Second, is the certification working after the billing service has been shut down? If so, yes."_Other Organiser"Or..."Continue with the last fee strategy"? The security of the two Fail-Open strategies is very different.
Third, do you need to restart the authentication device by adjusting the billing strategy? If you answer"Yes."This product is not suitable for the middle-sized campus network.
The three questions are not clear-cut, direct pass. Either the product is not good or the technology support capacity of the manufacturer may not keep up, and no one will be able to find it later.
Selected recommendations in actual projects
I was involved in a high-level college project that eventually selected the pine coupling program, which went online for over a year and had an intermediate billing service malfunction (disk full made it impossible to write new bills), but the certification was not affected."Sessions to keep you alive."The recoupling is back. If the package is in place, the billing module collapses to the same amount as a certified and a full-scale network breakout, and the complaint phone can be used for breaking the code.
But let's just say that the CyPlus program is completely fine with small campus networks if the manufacturer is stable and stable. The problem is that many schools have chosen it, and in a few years they will be larger to try to switch to plyer, and the cost of moving it is high.——NATHHELL_AUTH_GATEWAY and the logical sequence of a new project. So the model is selected to take into account expansion after three to five years.