Re: Request for Review: RADIUS Filter Attribute Document

[Barney Wolff <barney@databus.com>]

On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 10:01:56PM -0700, Glen Zorn (gwz) wrote:
> Bernard Aboba <> supposedly scribbled on Wednesday, October 18, 2006
> 9:46 PM:
> 
> >> I have mixed feelings.  On the one hand, there is precedent for
> >> glomming all instances of an attribute together, for EAP.  On the
> >> other, EAP is different in that the RADIUS code does not parse the
> >> result.  What will happen with the next attribute, where a byte
> >> value of 0x00 may be valid? 
> > 
> > This approach works for this particular attribute because the
> > IPFilter syntax only permits ASCII characters.  It's not a general
> > solution, as you point out.  That wider problem may be part of the
> > extended attribute discussion.  Since NAS-Filter-Rule isn't an
> > extended attribute I think that discussion is somewhat orthogonal. 
> 
> I think that if we can really come to an agreement upon the extension
> method fairly soon it should be.   

I strongly agree with Glen.  "There's more than one way to do it" works
well for Perl but not for us.

-- 
Barney Wolff         I never met a computer I didn't like.

--
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/>