OASIS eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) TC

The latest delegation draft

  • 1.  The latest delegation draft

    Posted 07-05-2005 15:01
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    xacml message

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


    Subject: The latest delegation draft


    All,
    
    I have uploaded a new version of the delegation draft. There are quite
    many changes.
    
    I have tried to improve the content and formatting of the various parts
    of the specification.
    
    I added missing parts of the schema fragments. I think the everything
    the current processing model refers to should be there now, but many
    features that have been discussed are not there yet, for instance
    "Access Permitted", passing policies and attribute assertions in the
    request and max delegation depth.
    
    I included the improvements that Anne suggested recently.
    
    During the last focus group meeting we discussed whether we should call
    the new elements of the target/request "Issuer" or "Delegate". I said
    then I would make it consistently "Issuer", but instead I have made them
    "Delegate". This is mostly due to that this was much less work for me
    now since 99% of the existing draft used "Delegate" and that I fear that
    "Issuer" would be confused with the policy issuer.
    
    During the focus meeting I also promised to Hal that I would give an
    example on the use of LaterDelegate, but I haven't had the time to do
    that yet. I decided to post the draft now anyway, and I will try to have
    it for the next version instead.
    
    I also removed Tim's pseudocode. During the focus meeting we decided do
    that for now, and perhaps reintroduce it later.
    
    I have added new open issues to the open issues list, so please have a
    look at it as well. There are some simple issues there that we should
    just decide on.
    
    Oh, and a small note: When writing the draft, I have stolen some text
    from the 2.0 specification. I hope that is ok. Just let me know whether
    I should reference that in some way.
    
    To move on with this, I would like that we make some decisions on the
    simple open issues. I would also like to get more feedback on whether
    this looks to satisfy everyone's needs and that it does no look to complex.
    
    For the text, I think much of it is in a bad state right now, so I think
    it needs more work to make it more clear. Any suggestions on that would
    be appreciated. I am not sure how to best make the non-normative
    introductory texts as clear as possible. I feel that this is of high
    priority for the next version, before we move on with more features.
    
    Best regards, Erik
    
    
    


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