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

From: Henning Schulzrinne ^lt;hgs@cs.columbia.edu>
Date: Fri Nov 07 2003 - 09:56:57 EST

>> I don't understand why the except clause in each permission statement
>> should be dismissed while the separate exception list model can be
>> supported.

The exception list is restricted in its functionality to avoid the
privacy problems caused by exception entries. Mixing the two means that
both list types would need to be restricted as described.

Also, having unbounded except lists makes processing more complicated
since the simple row model no longer applies (it's no longer a
relational table).

>>
>> 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.

I agree; I'm just trying to find the least harmful set of possible
solutions. Mixing two models is by far, in my opinion, the worst option.

>
> -andy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> Geopriv@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
Received on Fri Nov 7 09:58:21 2003

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