OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xacml message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [xacml] examples in specification






Hi, Seth

>the example implies something about the specification that isn't true
>(ie, that the PDP will interpret the contents of assignments), at least
>as I read the specification.

I don't agree that the example in section 4.2.4.3 isn't true. The
obligation described in that rule is "email" with three arguments, an email
address in the medical record referred by a specific XPath, a text string,
and subject id in the request context. These three arguments are not for
PDP but for PEP. PDP does not have to interpret those arguments and the
whole text string below the obligation element is sent back to PEP as a
part of the decision. No interpretation by PDP is not required. Instead,
PEP must understand those parameters but this kind of agreement between PDP
and PEP is already assumed, as described in section 5.35.

Michiharu



                                                                                                                                        
                      Seth Proctor                                                                                                      
                      <Seth.Proctor@Sun        To:       xacml@lists.oasis-open.org                                                     
                      .COM>                    cc:                                                                                      
                                               Subject:  [xacml] examples in specification                                              
                      2003/10/22 00:32                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                        




[With everyone at the F2F I don't expect a quick response, but I figured
 that if things are getting slow, this will give you something to
 discuss <g>]

I've spent the better part of this morning trying to explain how
Obligations work. The question came up because of the example in section
4.2.4.3 (Rule 3). In this example, AttributeAssignments contain
AttributeSelectors and AttributeDesignators. While this isn't illegal,
the example implies something about the specification that isn't true
(ie, that the PDP will interpret the contents of assignments), at least
as I read the specification.

This isn't the first example that has caused confusion. I know all work
items were supposed to be submitted before the F2F, but I would like to
propose that we review & correct all examples before the 2.0 release. I
don't think this is a work item so much as a natural requirement of
releasing a major-version revision of a specification, but I haven't
heard any discussion on the topic. Thoughts?


seth


To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xacml/members/leave_workgroup.php
.





[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]