"Hal Lockhart" <hlockhar@bea.com>
03/06/2007 09:50 AM
|
|
I don’t see any technical reason why SPML is inappropriate. Policy provisioning has been discussed by the Provisioning TC as a usecase. In addition, there are specific features of SPML, such as operators, batching, etc. which we would have to reinvent if we do not use SPML. Do you see a specific technical problem or have an alternative starting point in mind?
Hal
From: Anthony Nadalin [mailto:drsecure@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 10:27 AM
To: Prateek Mishra
Cc: Hal Lockhart; xacml@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [xacml] New Topic: Policy Provisioning
Is SPML the proper protocol for policy lifecycle mechanisms? Seems like a bit of a stretch
Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122
Prateek Mishra <prateek.mishra@oracle.com>
Prateek Mishra <prateek.mishra@oracle.com>
03/06/2007 08:56 AM
|
|
Hal,
Your proposed approach is of interest to us.
I will obtain additional feedback on this issue and post the use-cases
of interest to us.
- prateek
> I have taken a further look at SPML and suggest the following might be a
> reasonable approach. Base the implementation on the SPML v2 - XSD
> Profile. Use Policy ID as the PSO Identifier. Using SPML defined
> operations the PAP can inquire of a PDP what policies it currently has.
> Using SPML the PAP can add, modify and delete policies as required.
> Using the SPML Batch capability, the PAP can insure that a set of
> updates is applied as a unit, thus avoiding the problem of the PDP
> making decisions on some inconsistent, interim set of policies. SPML
> also provides other potentially useful features such as error codes,
> asynchronous operations and capability queries.
>
> The main thing that this proposal requires is people who are willing to
> contribute to the work and edit the document.
>
> Hal
>
>
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
