[ntp:hackers] Re: configuration file rewrite

Martin Burnicki martin.burnicki at meinberg.de
Fri Mar 3 08:47:35 UTC 2006


John Pettitt wrote:
> Martin Burnicki wrote:
> > If the configuration file code is being rewritten, what do you all think
> > about replacing the "restrict" parameter by something like "allow" and/or
> > "deny", like it is used by other programs?
> >
> > As we can see in the newsgroup, usage of "restrict" is often found
> > ambiguous, and misunderstood by users, especially since its meaning has
> > changed some time ago.
> >
> > Martin
> Whatever happens in the rewrite please please please don't change the
> meaning of any existing config keywords (by all means deprecate them if
> needed just don't re-use them to mean something else)- if something new
> is needed use a new keyword - having the same keyword mean different
> things in different versions of a program is grounds for an F in my book.

The meaning of the "restrict" keyword has already happened in the past, and I 
agree that this was not a good thing. 

What I meant in my original mail is that people who are not so familiar with 
NTP might misunderstand the meaning of the parameter. 

I'm not a native English speaking person, but from my understanding (and if I 
have a look at the NG, also from other users' understanding) the term 
"restrict myhost" could easily be meant in 2 ways: 

1.) access is restricted _to_ my host, my host is the only one who has access. 
In other words "allow myhost, deny all".

2.) access _from_ my host is restricted, my host does not have access, others 
may have. In other words "deny myhost"

So my suggestion is  to think about removing the word "restrict" from the 
keyword list, and add the words "allow" and "deny" (or similar) instead to 
make things clearer.

BTW, I'll forward this to Dave since Harlan has reminded me that Dave is not 
on this list anymore.

Martin Burnicki

Meinberg Funkuhren
Bad Pyrmont

More information about the hackers mailing list