[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: generalized permission for controls

To: Bruce Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com>
Subject: Re: generalized permission for controls
From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 17:34:47 -0700
Cc: robert byrne <robert.byrne@Sun.COM>, Ellen Stokes <stokes@austin.ibm.com>, ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
In-reply-to: <5.1.0.14.0.20010726092925.00ab4c40@mail.dtasi.com>
References: <3B602F7F.D29CBCFD@Sun.COM> <5.1.0.14.0.20010724215857.00aa36c8@mail.dtasi.com>

At 09:33 AM 7/26/2001, Bruce Greenblatt wrote [trimmed]:
>I also note that the control will be embedded in an existing operation, which possibly has other controls.   The interaction between the ACI for the operation, the ACI for this control and the ACI for all of the other controls is not defined by this.  I believe the interaction to be potentially very complex,

I concur with this statement.

>and best left for a separate document.

I suggest we re-engineer the ACM to be less tied to the specific
operation used to access the directory and more tied to the
kind of access operations provide to the directory.

Kurt

References:
- Re: generalized permission for controls
  - From: robert byrne <robert.byrne@Sun.COM>
- Re: generalized permission for controls
  - From: Bruce Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com>
- Re: generalized permission for controls
  - From: Bruce Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com>

Prev by Date: Do you know there secrets? -hqxpljlnyys
Next by Date: [no subject]
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread