[kea-dev] Extending client classification in Kea 1.1 - requirements/design
fdupont at isc.org
Wed Jan 20 15:09:42 UTC 2016
Tomek Mrugalski writes:
> Q1: We do have boolean (and, or, not) operators designed and planned for
> 1.1. Do we also want arithmetic comparison (>, <, >=, <=) operators?
=> IMHO we need boolean (and parentheses) but I am less convinced about
> Q2: Do we want find(string, what) operator?
=> perhaps but "what" needs to be defined.
> Q3: Do we want len(string) operator?
=> only if we have arithmetic.
> Q4: Do we want option.len specifier?
=> useless if we have Q3. BTW the option.exists is useful as
an option can be empty.
> Q5: Do we want to have an ability to specify that if packet is matched
> to a class, the packet is immediately dropped?
=> I like the idea but perhaps we need something more general for
dropping packets. Note the "immediately" term suggests more control
on the classification order.
There are some other missing items:
- a way to specify address binary constants using standard address syntax
- access to packet parameters like the remote address
Francis Dupont <fdupont at isc.org>
More information about the kea-dev