Re: delete permission

[George_Robert_Blakley_III@tivoli.com]

Yes it should; in fact I believe it does.  If someone thinks there's an
undefined case we should discuss it.

--bob

Bob Blakley
Chief Scientist
Tivoli SecureWay Business Unit


"David Chadwick" <d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk> on 07/25/2000 01:46:59 PM

Please respond to d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk

To:   Ellen Stokes <stokes@austin.ibm.com>, ietf-ldapext@netscape.com, Bruce
      Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com>
cc:    (bcc: George Robert Blakley III/Tivoli Systems)
Subject:  Re: delete permission





> A seperate but related issue to how the delete permission overrides
> the delete subtree permission, is the more general problems of how to
> treat overlapping permissions.  I don't know that there needs to be a
> general treatment, but when a new permission that is defined overlaps
> with a previously defined permission, there should be some discussion
> of the relationship.  Any thoughts?

The document is already starting to do this by giving precedence to
the different elements such as subject. Therefore I think that if
everthing can be given a pecking order/precedence, and this can be
described fully in the model doc, then everything should fall out in
the wash, shouldn't it?

David

***************************************************

David Chadwick
IS Institute, University of Salford, Salford M5 4WT
Tel +44 161 295 5351  Fax +44 161 745 8169
Mobile +44 790 167 0359
Email D.W.Chadwick@salford.ac.uk
Home Page  http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/chadwick.htm
Understanding X.500  http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/X500.htm
X.500/LDAP Seminars http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/seminars.htm
Entrust key validation string MLJ9-DU5T-HV8J

***************************************************