[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Filter Separation using a NULL?
Can we be stronger and state MUST NOT instead of SHOULD NOT on the mixture
of NAS-Traffic-Rule and NAS-Filter-Rule? If we stick with SHOULD NOT, then
what is the expected behavior of the NAS when both appear?
We can say MUST NOT, although then we'd probably say what a NAS should do if
both are included.
RADIUS packet or RADIUS message? I thought the right term was message.
The term packet is used in RFC 2865.
The current wording of "...filter rules separated by a NULL" makes it sound
like multiple rules can be put in within a single NAS-Filter-Id attribute.
I think this is what Emile suggested -- you concatenate all the attribute
together and then separate the rules via the NULL character. So you could
have multiple rules in one attribute, partial rules split between
attributes, etc.
--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>