On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 20:39:08 -0500 (EST) Benjamin Kaduk <[email protected]> wrote:
> > [After the lifetime, byte-life, etc fields are specified] > > + The identity in the new "combined" token is an application-specific > > + combination of the identities of the input tokens; note that this > > + combination may not be commutative. > > In particular the combined identity need not represent either the > union nor intersection of the privileges associated with the two > identities. (Right? I had asked rougly this question earlier but I > don't think I got a reply.) Yes (as I understand it). At first I put in a couple of examples, but I thought that might be too wordy and not necessary. I originally wrote something like: + The identity in the new "combined" token is an application-specific + Combination of the identities of the input tokens. For example, an + Application may define the identity of the combined token to be the + Union of the identities of the input tokens. However, an application may + Instead define the combined token identity to represent the identity of + Token0 to be acting in an environment represented by the identity of + Token1, or some other complex or application-specific meaning. This + Combined identity may or may not be representable as a simple set or + List, and may or may not be commutative. An application may also + define application-specific variants of the CombineTokens RPC to utilize + multiple different token combinations, or to utilize additional + application-specific input and/or output parameters. I don't know how much of that text is really necessary or even helpful, but that's how I'm thinking about it. -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
