OASIS eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) TC

 View Only

RE: [xacml] FW: SAML AI 0076 - XACML Policy Transport

  • 1.  RE: [xacml] FW: SAML AI 0076 - XACML Policy Transport

    Posted 10-15-2003 17:27
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    xacml message

    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


    Subject: RE: [xacml] FW: SAML AI 0076 - XACML Policy Transport


    Just to be clear, if we chose to add a generic "policy" layer as Anne has
    proposed, I believe SAML will adopt just that much.
    
    Either way we do it, the XAML Policy Statement and XACML Policy Query will
    be a part of the XACML standard, not the SAML standard.
    
    Hal
    
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: bill parducci [mailto:bill.parducci@overxeer.com]
    > Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 12:32 PM
    > To: xacml@lists.oasis-open.org
    > Subject: Re: [xacml] FW: SAML AI 0076 - XACML Policy Transport
    >
    >
    > i agree. i believe having the XACML TC take it on with the intent of
    > delivering a 'complete solution' for consideration to SAML will be
    > considerably more efficient. if the sentiment changes toward the
    > abstract approach later we will have to go through the same basic
    > process to define our requirements anyway, so there seems to be
    > little risk.
    >
    > b
    >
    > Hal Lockhart wrote:
    > > On the SAML call yesterday (10/14) the few people who expressed
    > an opinion
    > > felt that this was more appropriate to do in XACML. They felt that if we
    > > wanted to introduce an abstract "policy" element which could contain any
    > > kind of policy, not just XACML and then define the XACML
    > constructs below
    > > that, it might make sense to have SAML define abstract policy layer.
    > > Otherwise the feeling was this was more appropriate to do in XACML.
    > >
    > > Unless somebody feels the abstract policy layer is important, I
    > suggest we
    > > simply do it as described below. If at a future time there is a
    > push for an
    > > abstract layer, we can adjust accordingly. DOing it in the XACML TC will
    > > also make it easier to deal with any interactions with other
    > proposed 2.0
    > > changes, such as to Target.
    > >
    > > My feeling is that this will have to be a separate profile. Any
    > opinions on
    > > this?
    > >
    > > Hal
    >
    >
    > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the
    > roster of the OASIS TC), go to
    > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xacml/members/leave_w
    orkgroup.php.
    
    
    


    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]