RE: [xacml] Proposed semantics for operations involving INDETERMI NATE

[Daniel Engovatov <dengovatov@crosslogix.com>]

Title: RE: [xacml] Proposed semantics for operations involving INDETERMI NATE

Rule-combining algorithm.  I call it differntly to distinguish from the one defined in the standrad (takes into account only the defined states in response.  On lower level it has to take into account other possible outcomes: - not applicable, evaluated but could not finish (division by 0, timeout, data missing..), evaluated - returned false,  evaluated returned true - produce permit or deny effect.. 

The basic idea I was arguing about - moving this low level outcomes higher in the protocol food chain to allow
combining results from clustered PDPs and to allow, when it is needed, distinguishing between this evauation results.  Provides for a more flexible Rule-combining algorithm..

Can be done with advice, I agree - just does not look as clean and impossible to interoperate..

Daniel.

-----Original Message-----
From: Polar Humenn [mailto:polar@syr.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 11:55 AM
To: Daniel Engovatov
Cc: 'xacml '
Subject: RE: [xacml] Proposed semantics for operations involving
INDETERMI NATE

Daniel,

What are you calling these "recombination" algorithms?

-Polar

PS: I've got 3 hours before I'm out of here.