Plug-in Question

[Alan DeKok]

Phil Mayers wrote:
> In *fact* since sql_xlat function only support SELECT, there's no way of
> executing an SQL modify (insert, update, delete) using %{sql:} syntax -
> so you *have* to retain the sql post-auth logging function.

int  sql_xlat(...)
{
	if (strncasecmp(string, "SELECT", 6) == 0) {
		do select...
	} else if (strncasecmp(string, "UPDATE", 6) == 0) {
		do update...
	}
}

  That would work, wouldn't it?

> The unlang is nice, but lets not all lose sight of the proven, working
> and tested mechanisms in the server.

  The modules are there to solve common problems with simple solutions.
 I'd prefer to keep modules than to ship the server with 3k lines of
unlang policy.

> And while we're on the subject - lets not get caught up in some comp.
> sci. disagreement of what is authz versus authn. I agree that the 1.1.x
> terminology is very slightly confusing, and a slightly less ambiguous
> rename is good, but breaking working functionality at the same time is
> just plain wrong.

  Almost all of the changes in 2.0 have some kind of backwards
compatibility with 1.x.  That will continue.

  Alan DeKok.