[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
RE: LDAP ACL Architecture
- To: Ellen Stokes <stokes@austin.ibm.com>
- Subject: RE: LDAP ACL Architecture
- From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 01:45:53 -0700
- Cc: ietf-ldapext-acm@OpenLDAP.org, "James Benedict" <grunt@nortelnetworks.com>, Rob Byrne - Sun Microsystems <Robert.Byrne@france.sun.com>, Jim Sermersheim <JIMSE@novell.com>, helmut.volpers@icn.siemens.de, m.wahl@innosoft.com, kyungae_lim@iris.com, leifj@it.su.se, paulle@microsoft.com, albert.langer@neither.org, David Ward <DSWARD@novell.com>, Roger Harrison <RHARRISON@novell.com>, Sukanta Ganguly <SGANGULY@novell.com>, keith.richardson@peerlogic.com, sanjay.jain@software.com, gblakley@tivoli.com, djbyrne@us.ibm.com, hsastry@us.oracle.com, sshrivas@us.oracle.com, usriniva@us.oracle.com
- In-reply-to: <4.2.2.20000410225137.00a3ac90@popmail2.austin.ibm.com>
- References: <438D12915E64D2118AB10000F8C1C07802C11C40@zcard00e.ca.norte l.com>
At 11:41 PM 4/10/00 -0500, Ellen Stokes wrote:
>I disagree with Rob's proposal to moving forward with access control.
>
>Making the access control model spec elective effectively tells vendors
>"don't" implement - and from experience, they won't.
An elective features can be RECOMMENDED or OPTIONAL. Vendors
generally tend to implement most RECOMMENDED and many OPTIONAL
features. The fact that some vendors may choose not to
implement a given feature is not a valid reason for making
something mandatory to implement.
Kurt