Not absolutely so. Adding a few blocked destinations to each groups not the
same as adding a hundreds active destinations to each group.
Which other convenient way you see with routing policies to block a few hundred prefixes that change dynamically?
I don't understand what does it mean 'dynamically', but one way is to rout blocked destination to unexistant GW (100.100.100.100 or 192.168.168.168).
I don't agree - authentication/authorization step is the right place to decide
to which resources the user is authorized to.
2) Just stop thinking about groups;) Some people do not use groups at all.
No voiptariffgrp and voiptariffsel. Then you see that to match the
correct
tariff, we need to compare currencies.
And what about some other peoples, who don't use neither groups nor currencies? Or don't use destinations? Or gnugk at all? Whether the developer can satisfy inquiries (or whims?) of absolute all possible users? Whether better to enter any restrictions? I, apparently, have understood: you are that user who does not use groups!
I don't need to use groups, as I am a developer and don't need sqlbill for my work
at all. But some people I know don't use groups as they don't need them.
Or use them only occasionally, for some customers, not for each customer.
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click
_______________________________________________________
List: Openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=8549 Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/
