Re: generalized permission for controls

[robert byrne <robert.byrne@Sun.COM>]

Kurt,

This is a bit curt for me :).  Can you elaborate ?

Rob.

"Kurt D. Zeilenga" wrote:
> 
> I would suggest this be left out of the specification
> and instead addressed by generalizing permissions
> to grant access based upon a categorization of the
> type of the access (read,write,...) being made as
> opposed to the operation/sub-operation used to access
> the directory.
> 
> Kurt
> 
> At 01:08 PM 7/24/2001, Ellen Stokes wrote:
> >Folks,
> >
> >Mark Davidson proposed a generalized permission for
> >controls in his note dated July 6 on ACM permissions.
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >ACI = rights "#" target "#" generalSubject
> >
> >permission = "x" ; execute control
> >; permission u can only be used on controls
> >
> >target = "[all]" / "[entry]" / (attribute *("," attribute)) /
> >"[controls]" / (controlType *("," controlType))
> >
> >controlType is defined in RFC2251
> >
> >Control use - can use control where aci is active (this
> >replaces the g permission in a more general way)
> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >The authors like this idea and are working on text to
> >incorporated this into the draft and move the
> >getEffectiveRights control (and permission) in line with
> >this proposal.
> >
> >We'll be putting a synopsis of this out shortly to the list.
> >
> >In the interim, any comments?
> >
> >Ellen