[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: Resource sets and resource string semantics
I think before we discuss HOW to do this sort of thing we should discuss whether it desirable. > The way I would see the conversation going is: > > PEP: Can Alice access http://www.hp.com/finance/fred.xls > PDP: Yes, and Alice can access http://www.hp.com/* > > PEP: Can Alice access http://www.hp.com/finance/mary.xls > PEP-Cache: Yes I feel very uncomfortable about the PDP volunteering information it has not been asked for. It seems to add various kinds of risks without clear benefit. > I don't like the idea of unconstrained wildcard matching etc. > However simple > hierarchical partitioning is probably enough for what we > need. After all the > admin will probably organize directories so that the wildcards match > cleanly. Our experience has been that this is not the case. Names are chosen for reasons other that access patterns. A naming scheme which works for one category of user does not fit another. This would seem to me to optimize a rather rare situation, while adding various risks. Hal
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC