[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: statement changes suggestions
From: |
Jan-Henrik Haukeland |
Subject: |
Re: statement changes suggestions |
Date: |
Mon, 04 Aug 2003 13:08:27 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Civil Service, linux) |
Martin Pala <address@hidden> writes:
>> change the checksum statement:
>>
>> 1) Do not change checksum and keep it as is
>> 2) Change it as outlined above
>>
>>
> I think this behavior is easily possible to reach via:
>
> if checksum ... failed then alert
> timeout(1, 1)
Right, clever!
> We can recommend this setting for security reasons, but i think it
> is bad to have different behavior for alert statement in different
> tests.
I take it you are in favor of 1) then? After rethinking I'm also
inclined to 1) (that is, do not change the checksum statement) since
the proposed changes will implement a not so obvious double-meaning
for the alert. Unless others have a better suggestion for using the
checksum statement with action I suggest then, that we leave it as
is. At least for now.
--
Jan-Henrik Haukeland
Re: statement changes suggestions, Jan-Henrik Haukeland, 2003/08/04