Re: [Geopriv] RE: [Simple] Changes in xcap-auth

From: Andrew Newton ^lt;anewton@ecotroph.net>
Date: Fri Nov 07 2003 - 09:15:29 EST

As I recall: at the interim meeting in September we were fortunate to
have two people in attendance that had implemented similar access
systems. It was their opinion that the 'except' clause adds enough
processing to be a scalability concern for even moderately loaded
systems. The fastest systems are able to take a set of rules and
process them one after another until there is a hit.

Naoko ITO wrote:
>
> I don't understand why the except clause in each permission statement
> should be dismissed while the separate exception list model can be
> supported.
>
> 1) introducing a separate exception list but not supporting it,
> 2) introducing an except clause in each permission but not supporting
> it.

Neither do I. But in my opinion, both should be dismissed.

-andy

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
Received on Fri Nov 7 09:26:23 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 22 2004 - 12:32:24 EST