radcli_dae_reply(3)

πŸ“¦ version 2.0.1, in arch rolling

πŸ’… radcli_dae_reply(3) β€” bestie edition πŸŽ€

ok so this is a page from the Radius client library (yes, that radcli), and it's about answering DAE requests. buckle up, it's actually so clean ✨


✨ NAME ✨

radcli_dae_reply β€” answer a request with an ACK or NAK, selecting 41/42 or 44/45 from the request's own code, mirroring its Proxy-State attributes, and computing the Response Authenticator over the request's Authenticator. 🫢

like, it literally does four things at once and doesn't even brag about it. main character energy fr fr πŸ‘‘


🌸 SYNOPSIS 🌸

#include <radcli/>

int radcli_dae_reply(
    radcli_dae_request  *req,
    int                  ack
);

πŸ’– DESCRIPTION πŸ’–

the whole vibe lives in the parameters and the return value, so let's get into it ⬇️

πŸ¦‹ PARAMETERS πŸ¦‹

  • req β€” a request passed to a radcli_dae_handler, not yet replied to. lowkey important: not yet replied to. you get one shot at this one, bestie πŸ’…
  • ack β€” non-zero for an ACK (Disconnect-ACK/CoA-ACK), zero for a bare NAK with no Error-Cause attribute. but listen β€” most callers rejecting a request should use radcli_dae_reply_error() instead, which also states why. so if you're about to send a naked NAK, just... don't πŸ™ˆ the error variant is right there and it explains itself iykyk

⭐ RETURN VALUE ⭐

  • 0 β€” once the reply is handed to the network. slay, it's out of your hands now πŸ•ŠοΈ
  • -1 β€” on failure: req is NULL, it was already replied to, or the reply could not be sent. πŸ’€
no cap, -1 is the "something went sideways" bucket β€” check whether you're double-replying before you go blaming the network πŸ™ˆ

🌈 SEE ALSO 🌈


and that's the whole page, bestie πŸ“ go forth and ACK responsibly πŸ’œ

radcli Β· 2026-10-10 Β· radcli_dae_reply(3) β€” mwah, xoxo πŸ§šβ€β™€οΈβœ¨

πŸ“¦ where this page comes from