[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [xacml] thought about simple rules
One of my colleagues suggests we make the "Target" element optional in a "Rule". What do people think? -Anne ------- start of forwarded message ------- To: anne.anderson@sun.com Subject: thought about simple rules Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 16:56:21 -0400 In the case of policies that have only one rule in the ruleset, it seems to me that the common case will be that the target in the policy and the target in the rule will be the same (indeed, there are examples of this in the spec). I was thinking that it might help to compact policies if the spec allowed (for example) for the target in a rule to be optional, and in that case it would inherit the rule in the policy. It seems like something along those lines would help scenarios where there are lots of policy files, but each file contained (essentially) only one rule. I'm just concerned because I'm starting to think about how big these policy files will be, and it's fairly clear that there's a lot of repeated stuff that will make relatively small policies use up lots of bits. seth ------- end of forwarded message ------- -- Anne H. Anderson Email: Anne.Anderson@Sun.COM Sun Microsystems Laboratories 1 Network Drive,UBUR02-311 Tel: 781/442-0928 Burlington, MA 01803-0902 USA Fax: 781/442-1692
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC