!= and !~ operators

[Alan DeKok]

Joe Maimon <jmaimon at ttec.com> wrote:
> Wouldnt it make more sense if these operators matched if no attributes 
> were present that matched or that no attributes were present at all?

  It's difficult to say.

> If one wanted to check that the attribute was present but did not 
> contain value X, they would use
> 
> 	Attribute =* "", Attribute != "X"

  The same thing goes for "==".  Having the attribute not exist is
technically an exception, not a failed match.

> I have tested it to an extent and would appreciate feedback.

  My main concern is changing the behavior of the server.

  I'd prefer to move these kinds of checks to rlm_policy, as it's new,
and won't break existing systems.

  Alan DeKok.