[j-nsp] Re: Re: Re: Re: Interfaces, deactivate vs disable

[Daniel Roesen]

On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 04:59:07PM -0400, Phil Shafer wrote:
> Daniel Roesen writes:
> >> Are you looking for a full term or just an "otherwise"?
> >Uhm, what do you mean with "just an 'otherwise'"? Can you given an
> >example?
> 
> My question was whether you needed a full term or just the "then"
> part of it, as a "then" to be applied when no terms match.

Just the latter.

> I was thinking of the way you can currently put a term-less "then"
> after all your term in a policy-statement:
[...]
> We can do something like this for filters.  It's now PR 60413.

Excellent! Thanks Phil!

> >I know it's possible for policies by no using "term" but just "then"
> >directly in the policy-statement level (which is ugly and makes readers
> >scratch their head), but this is not possible with firewall filters.
> 
> We'll likely follow the existing precedent so readers only have so
> scratch their head once.

I'll rest for it. Better 95% than 0%. At least the functionality would
be there then. ;)


Best regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr at cluenet.de -- dr at IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0