[xacml] Re: [xacml-comment] Incomplete: behavior if <Obligations>present but not supported

[Anne Anderson <Anne.Anderson@Sun.com>]

We made support for Obligations optional because support might
infringe on IBM's IP claims.

Anne

On 18 November, Polar Humenn writes: Re: [xacml-comment] Incomplete: behavior if <Obligations> present  but not supported
 > From: Polar Humenn <polar@syr.edu>
 > To: Anne Anderson <Anne.Anderson@sun.com>
 > Subject: Re: [xacml-comment] Incomplete: behavior if <Obligations> present
 >  but not supported
 > Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 13:40:30 -0500 (EST)
 > 
 > 
 > Why doesn't the PDP support Obligations? I thought it did. I thought the
 > issue was whether the PEP supported Obligations, of which I think we
 > solved.
 > 
 > Isn't it all laid out pretty well, on how the obligations are collected up
 > the evaluation, right?  It's in the schema, right?
 > 
 > I really don't like the PDP returing "Deny" for something "wrong", as if
 > it is taking the presumption that Deny is the "safe" answer for you.
 > 
 > If anything, if this really is indeed the case, I believe the "answer"
 > should be Intdeterminate.
 > 
 > Too busy at the OMG meeting,....
 > -Polar
 > 
 > 
 > 

-- 
Anne H. Anderson             Email: Anne.Anderson@Sun.COM
Sun Microsystems Laboratories
1 Network Drive,UBUR02-311     Tel: 781/442-0928
Burlington, MA 01803-0902 USA  Fax: 781/442-1692