Re: [xacml] Alternative to Michiharu's proposal.

[bill parducci <bill.parducci@overxeer.com>]

looks good, just a couple of things:

seems to be some wording missing:

> This use profile covers the a single PEP
> configured with a single PDP.

should read (?):

This use profile covers the CASE OF a single PEP
configured with a single PDP.

same here:

> Multiple PEP to PDP configurations outside
> the scope of this specification

Multiple PEP to PDP configurations ARE outside OF the scope of this specification

i don't think the word 'single' should apply to the PEP -- this model is independent upon the number of PEPs (as long as there is a single source of authorization). that said i propose that this be the text:


7.1 Use Profile for XACML Request

This section describes the use profile for using an XACML PDP in an application environment. This use profile covers the case off one or more PEPs configured to make authorization decision queries to a single PDP. Multiple PEP to PDP configurations are outside of the scope of this specification.

An application functions in the role of the PEP if it guards access to a particular resource and asks the PDP for an access decision. The PEP that
asks the PDP for an access decision SHALL abide by the result of that access decision in the following way:

A PEP SHALL allow access to the particular resource ONLY IF a valid XACML response of "Permit" is returned by the PDP. The PEP SHALL deny access to
the particular resource in all other cases. An XACML response of "Permit" SHALL be considered valid ONLY IF the PEP understands all of the
obligations that may be contained in the response.

A PEP that receives a valid XACML response of "Permit" with obligations SHALL be responsible for fulfilling all of those obligations. A PEP that
receives a XACML response of "Deny" with obligations SHALL be responsible for fulfilling all of the obligations that it understands.


b