[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Proposed Resolution to Issue 198: Attribute Concatenation/Splitting
Why would we want to limit the number of possible rules?
I don't think we want to do that. As a Glen has pointed out, there are
deployments in which a very large number of rules are being used.
Why would we want to hide from the receiver whether a rule is going
to be segmented?
It's probably best not to hide that from the receiver.
If TAG is non-zero, the next NAS-Filter-Rule attribute is a
continuation of this one. If TAG is zero, this attribute is
the last or only segment of this rule.
So if a continued filter is followed by a non-continued one, then we have
two attributes with zero (0) tag fields?
Why not just say that the tag field needs to be different between adjacent
filter rules, with the exception of a zero tag that represents a
non-continued filter rule?
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.