[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: RE: [xacml] another small time/date issue
To clarify myself: yes, in most cases it is the PDP that will "provide" this attributes. But as we where discussing for quite a while now - I do not think it is feasible to put exact requirement on exactly how it is done. The fact that it is a single block on Figure 1 does not mean it must be implemented as a monolithic piece in any sense. Could you suggest an example of a clarification? Maybe it would be easier for me to understand why it is a problem then. Thank you. Daniel. -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Engovatov Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 10:06 PM To: Seth Proctor Cc: bill parducci; xacml@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: RE: [xacml] another small time/date issue If I understand the block diagram in the specification correctly it is PIP that is responsible for all and any of the attributes. The source of this Information, except for the request context is not specified and left to the implementation.. -----Original Message----- From: Seth Proctor [mailto:Seth.Proctor@Sun.COM] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 8:30 PM To: Daniel Engovatov Cc: bill parducci; xacml@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: RE: [xacml] another small time/date issue > ..but PDP is not intended to be a source (for "adding/enhancing") of > information, is it? It already is. The PDP must supply current time/date values if they're not included in a request. Unlike other attributes, these values must always be available, so in practice most people will use a PDP that knows how to provide this data directly. This is why I wanted to see some clarifiaction. seth You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xacml/members/leave_workgro up.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]