xlat in rlm_attr_filer
Hello, I've just received a wish for setting a reply attribute on proxied request based on one of the request attributes. We are already using rlm_attr_filer to do attribute filtering on these requests, so adding something like this to the "attrs" file seemed natural: realm.example.com Attribute := `%{Request-Attribute}` But I found that rlm_attr_filter doesn't do xlat. So I was wondering why? Is a patch welcome, or are there good reasons not to do this? (I was able to workaround this using the rlm_files module to modify this attribute instead, but I'm willing to work om rlm_attr_filter if I know that it has a chance of being accepted) Bjørn
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rn_Mork?= <bjorn@mork.no> wrote:
But I found that rlm_attr_filter doesn't do xlat. So I was wondering why? Is a patch welcome, or are there good reasons not to do this?
I don't think there's any good reason for this. The patch shouldn't be too hard. Alan DeKok.
"Alan DeKok" <aland@nitros9.org> writes:
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rn_Mork?= <bjorn@mork.no> wrote:
But I found that rlm_attr_filter doesn't do xlat. So I was wondering why? Is a patch welcome, or are there good reasons not to do this?
I don't think there's any good reason for this.
The patch shouldn't be too hard.
How about something like this? It does add a bit of overhead by making an xlatted copy of the complete checklist, but this allows us to _test against_ xlatted values in addition to adding them. Thoughts? Unnecessary to xlat anything but the added attributes? Bjørn
participants (2)
-
Alan DeKok -
Bjørn Mork