[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xacml] (local) names and issuer as string issue
Polar Humenn wrote: > But even then, specifying the "semantics identifier" gets you into > interoperability problems. 'interoperability' problems or 'compatibility' problems? not to swerve off into pedanticLand, but i differentiate between the two of these. in the former you have two (or more) systems that cannot determine the meaning of the "semantics identifier" syntax, in the latter you have two (or more) systems that know what to do with the mapping itself. the problem seems to be similar with that of issuing obligations: it is possible to receive back an obligation that you [PDP] don't know what to do with. likewise my guess is that an identify mapping that is returned in a format that is indecipherable is treated as an unknown subject. the big difference here is that it seems unlikely that one would make such a structure optional; compliant devices will have to understand how to handle whatever mechanism/extension point is derived, but not necessarily know how to decode the responses, beyond a (single?, couple?, few?) normative model(s). b
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]