OASIS eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) TC

 View Only

RE: [xacml] XACML 2.0 Hierarchical Resources, Draft 2.0

  • 1.  RE: [xacml] XACML 2.0 Hierarchical Resources, Draft 2.0

    Posted 05-26-2004 20:13
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    xacml message

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


    Subject: RE: [xacml] XACML 2.0 Hierarchical Resources, Draft 2.0


    Let me clarify my objections a little bit.   With the new draft they
    changed (and diminished :) a bit.
    There is clearly a value in having a well defined and useful
    hierarchical name schema.  I would personally love to see that in any
    system I have to work with. :)  Too bad it never happens.  
    In this particular case, it boils down to a specification on how to
    construct such a naming scheme so that it works well with some standard
    XACML functions.   I will leave aside the issue of whether it is a good
    idea at all to use irreversible matching functions in target.
    As I read the spec, usage of this particular naming convention is
    proposed as a "fallback" naming suggestion in the absence of a
    "profile".   That is good.  Nobody will like the need to develop
    mandatory one-way naming mapping for an established
    application/framework.  
    What does it mean in reality?  If you do not follow the suggested
    naming, then you automatically have a profile? What is a "profile"?  Do
    we have a definition of what a resource naming "profile" is?  Do we have
    a standard way to describe it?  Anne mentioned this issue in her e-mail,
    but I do not see any hint on an answer.  
    We are attempting to standardize something well out of our scope without
    any clear definitions on when, where and how such "standardization" is
    applicable. 
    Daniel.
    
       Note that an objection to this standard representation has
       been raised by Daniel, yet other members requested it and
       think it is important.  The TC will have to decide whether to
       include this representation or not.
    
    
    


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