Standardised JSON VP list format
a.cudbardb at freeradius.org
Tue Nov 8 15:04:23 CET 2011
On 8 Nov 2011, at 14:34, Alan DeKok wrote:
> Phil Mayers wrote:
>> I'll note this syntax doesn't preserve the original inter-attribute
>> ordering in the packet
> RFC 2865 mandates that inter-attribute order doesn't matter.
>> (though I assume it will preserve intra-attribute
> Yes. RFC 2865 mandates that intra-attribute ordering is preserved.
>> Whether this matters or not, I don't know (but what about
>> tagged/group attrs?)
> Tags could be another field in an "attribute" struct. But
> semantically, attributes with the same tag are grouped together.
> Tags are really an atrocious hack.
> My $0.02 is to represent them as fields in an attribute:
Hmm, no, i'd rather have something directly tied to the value seeing as multiple values can be encoded, and i'd rather have roughly similar formats for request and response...
I don't see that there's any other possible use for nested arrays in the value key?
a.cudbardb at networkradius.com
Technical consultant and solutions architect
15 Ave. du Granier, Meylan, France
+33 4 69 66 54 50
More information about the Freeradius-Devel