Re: statement changes suggestions

[Jan-Henrik Haukeland]

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