Re: policy model Q, SARuleInPolicyGroup::GroupComponent
Wes Hardaker <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipsp |
|---|---|
| Organization | Network Associates - NAI Labs |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
>>>>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2002 18:38:22 -0400, "Lee Rafalow" <[email protected]> said: Lee> If there's a compelling reason to change it and Luis & Hilarie Lee> are ok including such a change in our editorial update, I don't Lee> have a problem with it. Jamie, I think Intel asked for this Lee> simplification; comments? I think it would be a good thing to do. Right now, nearly all the classes are fairly reusable (ie, actions, filters, conditions, etc) *except* rules which seems a bit odd. An example usage would be two different groups assigned to two different endpoints, but each should contain a specific rule after the endpoint-specific-rules had been ruled out. (I thought about trying to use the word "ruler" as well in that sentence, but it just didn't work). -- Wes Hardaker NAI Labs Network Associates