>> Steve Edwards wrote: >> >>> It may not be as intended, but from a "user" standpoint, it seems >>> logical >>> and convenient to establish "policy" in [general] and make exceptions in >>> the entities as needed. >> >> Right... for when you have one policy. When you have two policies, each >> that apply to a dozen or more entries in the config file, then it really >> doesn't help, it harms. Templates solve that problem completely, because >> each policy can be its own (named!) template, and they can be combined. >> Since templates are also very easy to use for the single policy case, >> they are a better solution to teach people (and they're also easier to >> implement in the configuration code of the module). >> >> In other modules created since chan_sip, we've intentionally avoided >> this problem, and you'll note that in nearly every other module, the >> [general] section is exactly that; general settings for the module, and >> not defaults. > > In my NACL work, I implemented a channel-wide NACL for blacklist purposes.
Can you talk more about this? Were your Named ACL's something other than templates? What was/were the specific 'pain point/s' you were trying to assuage? For example did you need something not currently offered in the existing frameworks, for example DNS-resolved hostnames for permitting/restricting registration/connection? Or were you just doing a clever/elaborate/well-implemented setup of the existing frameworks? I for one would love to hear your 10,000 foot concepts and any details you'd be willing to share. -Karl -- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users