[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: ACL Policy should be a property of the partition of namespace...

To: "Colin Robbins" <Colin.Robbins@nexor.co.uk>
Subject: Re: ACL Policy should be a property of the partition of namespace...
From: "Paul Leach" <paulle@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 10:10:47 -0700
Cc: <ietf-ldapext@netscape.com>, "'Ed Reed'" <ED_REED@novell.com>
Delivered-to: ldapext-archive@critical-angle.com
Resent-date: Fri, 8 May 1998 10:11:30 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-from: ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
Resent-message-id: <"RIdiy1.0.wU1._opKr"@glacier>
Resent-sender: ietf-ldapext-request@netscape.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

You're forgetting something -- the other policies _already exist_.
Acknowledging that fact, and making the allocation of policy ID
codepoints dependent on a specification of the formats used by the
policy, then you have a lever to encourage specification and hence
interoperability. Ignoring it can only be worse.

The marketplace will take care of insuring that there are only a small
number of relevant policies.
- ---------------------
Paul J. Leach <paulle@microsoft.com>
PGP Key ID: 0x978829DD
Fingerprint: 9EFA A405 39B4 F91F DE6F 8939 6FE9 F5D8
Key Servers: http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371 ldap://certserver.pgp.com


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 5.5.5

iQCVAwUBNVM8lsqlCdSXiCndAQE0MwQAhTkmi6sc1B7KocedL/5MgcP6NsQ0iDvl
K5NkYGWtl+inHQiNFZANemYYuWncv81Exzunsg+2a/gg/1s0O29nfl1exK9EvYCV
VYX24cdrWdpOQU097N06Sw7yDIcUo/xRAtmuP+JSKKpsvUYzQP3pwnEfQ41glPOf
POPrrkzsQ/c=
=yifo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Prev by Date: Re: Naming of ACLs, Replication etc
Next by Date: Re: ACL Policy should be a property of the partition of namespace...
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread