GIT Log for 2009-03-29 23:33 GMT
commit aa40f81af40a5f5b46ced1351692a8fcd738f862 Author: Alan T. DeKok <aland@freeradius.org> Date: Sun Mar 29 13:52:15 2009 -0700 Add support for !* filtering. All attributes will be deleted man/man5/unlang.5 | 30 +++++++++++++----------------- src/main/evaluate.c | 8 ++++++++ 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 aland wrote:
commit aa40f81af40a5f5b46ced1351692a8fcd738f862 Author: Alan T. DeKok <aland@freeradius.org> Date: Sun Mar 29 13:52:15 2009 -0700
Add support for !* filtering.
All attributes will be deleted man/man5/unlang.5 | 30 +++++++++++++----------------- src/main/evaluate.c | 8 ++++++++ 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html Finally :)
!~ ? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAknQYfAACgkQcaklux5oVKL0twCdEsjy7UZm3oAJ5k7tRmsKyE4B 5HUAn2OiEoC9GVijmBS2TEb3Ncxmsxr/ =vSF4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 aland wrote:
commit aa40f81af40a5f5b46ced1351692a8fcd738f862 Author: Alan T. DeKok <aland@freeradius.org> Date: Sun Mar 29 13:52:15 2009 -0700
Add support for !* filtering.
All attributes will be deleted man/man5/unlang.5 | 30 +++++++++++++----------------- src/main/evaluate.c | 8 ++++++++ 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html Wait... shouldn't this be -* (and -~) ? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEUEARECAAYFAknQYosACgkQcaklux5oVKK7+QCXWxlaZbJJk8M3u2zK1ciOvv64 xACeLhVRf6nlWGixzOahC3HUKvMbIBU= =CB/H -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 30/3/09 08:01, Alan DeKok wrote:
Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
Wait... shouldn't this be -* (and -~) ?
There's a -* ?
No but there's a -=, wouldn't -=* make more sense ?
Or, what would be a bit more sane:
filter permit { # permits only these Foo = bar ... }
filter delete { Foo == bar # delete all matching }
Which attribute list are those being applied to? Personally I think prefixing *all* the attribute removal operators with '-' would allow users to better deduce their meaning. For example, I can see the logic behind '==' removing every attribute that doesn't match, but I think it would be easier for the layman to infer what -!= does. Most of the time I can see method to the madness, just not with attribute removal operators :) Arran -- Arran Cudbard-Bell (A.Cudbard-Bell@sussex.ac.uk), Authentication, Authorisation and Accounting Officer, Infrastructure Services (IT Services), E1-1-08, Engineering 1, University Of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9QT DDI+FAX: +44 1273 873900 | INT: 3900 GPG: 86FF A285 1AA1 EE40 D228 7C2E 71A9 25BB 1E68 54A2
On 30/3/09 10:29, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
On 30/3/09 08:01, Alan DeKok wrote:
Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
Wait... shouldn't this be -* (and -~) ?
There's a -* ?
No but there's a -=,
* wouldn't -=*/-* make more sense ?
Or, what would be a bit more sane:
filter permit { # permits only these Foo = bar ... }
filter delete { Foo == bar # delete all matching }
Actually that's quite neat. I guess the list this was applied to would depend on the section it was listed under ? Lets you move policy out of the business logic which is nice :) Still not sure about that '==' though.
Which attribute list are those being applied to?
Personally I think prefixing *all* the attribute removal operators with '-' would allow users to better deduce their meaning.
For example, I can see the logic behind '==' removing every attribute that doesn't match, but I think it would be easier for the layman to infer what -!= does.
Most of the time I can see method to the madness, just not with attribute removal operators :)
Arran
-- Arran Cudbard-Bell (A.Cudbard-Bell@sussex.ac.uk), Authentication, Authorisation and Accounting Officer, Infrastructure Services (IT Services), E1-1-08, Engineering 1, University Of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9QT DDI+FAX: +44 1273 873900 | INT: 3900 GPG: 86FF A285 1AA1 EE40 D228 7C2E 71A9 25BB 1E68 54A2
Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
No but there's a -=, wouldn't -=* make more sense ?
That's getting wonky.
Which attribute list are those being applied to?
<shrug> Maybe: require request { # must match to stay in the list foo == bar a < b } delete reply { # delete matching ones from the list. foo == bar a > b }
Personally I think prefixing *all* the attribute removal operators with '-' would allow users to better deduce their meaning.
Ugh. That's *very* unusual. How many languages have magic operators that are 3-4 characters long?
For example, I can see the logic behind '==' removing every attribute that doesn't match, but I think it would be easier for the layman to infer what -!= does.
Most of the time I can see method to the madness, just not with attribute removal operators :)
It's at least documented. Alan DeKok.
participants (3)
-
Alan DeKok -
aland＠deployingradius.com
-
Arran Cudbard-Bell