RE: Filter-rules-01 & Issue 192

[<jouni.korhonen@teliasonera.com>]

Hi,

See inline marked with [JiK]..

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sanchez, Mauricio (ProCurve) [mailto:mauricio.sanchez@hp.com] 
> Sent: 19. maaliskuuta 2007 17:41
> To: Korhonen, Jouni /TeliaSonera Finland Oyj; radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Filter-rules-01 & Issue 192
> 
> 
> Jouni writes...
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > > [MS1]  There may actually be more than one rule per attribute. 
> > > Another interesting case is when one rule is split across two 
> > > attributes (due to length).  What if we added the following to in 
> > > the description section?
> > > "A NAS-Traffic-Rule attribute may contain a partial rule, 
> one rule, 
> > > or more than one rule. Traffic rules may be contained across 
> > > attribute boundaries, so implementations cannot assume that 
> > > individual traffic rules begin or end on attribute boundaries."
> > 
> > [JiK] The proposed text is OK. Just wondering whether the 
> ABNF is up 
> > to date with the above text. I could be wrong but to me it 
> appears the 
> > the ABNF cannot support more than one rule per attribute.
> 
> [MS2] Are you thinking that we should replace the following,
> 
> " ; Start of ABNF description of NAS-Traffic-Rule        
>          rule           =  "v1" " " (flush-rule / permit-all-rule  
>                            / l2-filter-rule / l2-tunnel-rule 
>                            / ip-filter-rule / ip-tunnel-rule  
>                            / http-filter-rule / http-redir-rule)  
>                            rule-delim"
> with
> 
> " ; Start of ABNF description of NAS-Traffic-Rule 
> 	   rule-list      = rule *(rule)
>          rule           =  "v1" " " (flush-rule / permit-all-rule  
>                            / l2-filter-rule / l2-tunnel-rule 
>                            / ip-filter-rule / ip-tunnel-rule  
>                            / http-filter-rule / http-redir-rule)  
>                            rule-delim"
> 
>  

[JiK] Yes. Is there a particular reason to add a trailing rule-delim if
there is only a single rule? If not maybe the example below would work:

	   rule-list      =  rule
         rule-list      =/ rule-list rule-delim rule
         rule           =  "v1" " " (flush-rule / permit-all-rule  
                           / l2-filter-rule / l2-tunnel-rule 
                           / ip-filter-rule / ip-tunnel-rule  
                           / http-filter-rule / http-redir-rule)  
  
> > > [MS1] Ok.  How about the following in the intro?
> > > "Layer 2 filters are useful in filtering BPDU traffic for which 
> > > layer 3 filters have no effect."
> > >
> > > We may also consider adding BPDU to the terminology section.
> > 
> > [JiK] Thanks.. and I think it would be good to add the BPDU to the 
> > terminology section.
> 
> [MS2] Ok.  
>  
> > And then one more nit. Aren't we supposed to use 
> example.com for all 
> > example domain names? Now there are goo.org etc ;)
> 
> [MS2] Dunno. You're probably right. I've been searching for 
> an RFC that describes formatting for URLs, but haven't found any.  

[JiK] RFC2606 I guess..

Cheers,
	Jouni

> 
> Cheers,
> MS 
> 

--
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/>