MHonArc v2.5.2 -->
















xacml message






[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [Elist Home]








Subject: RE: [xacml] [policy-model] A Proposal




From: Hal Lockhart <hal.lockhart@entegrity.com>
To: 'Simon Godik' <sgodik@crosslogix.com>, 'Tim Moses' <tim.moses@entrust.com>,xacml <xacml@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 09:23:44 -0500






Title: RE: [xacml] [policy-model] A Proposal



I 
think this is the kind of thing that cannot be argued in the abstract. A 
complete set of boolean operators can in principle, express any possible policy. 
However, it is possible that a particular scheme will make it very awkward to 
express common sorts of policies.
 
What 
we need is short example proposals of a possible expression and its semantics, 
along with examples of policies hard to express in alternative schemes. Bill did 
something of this sort a couple of weeks ago, but I would have liked to see the 
intended semantics stated more explicitly.
 
Hal