Artem, You are absolutely correct. We need to tackle this, The current implementation does not do a good job at this yet. Patches are welcome ;)
I believe that the most common implementation is the generalization strategy. This should be the default in my mind. Supporting multiple strategies is I believe a nice to have for now. Thoughts? Regards, David. --- "Grinshtein, Artem" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello All, > > IMHO, the term "hierarchical" is not clearly defined > in jetspeed. There is more than one meaning for > hierarchical roles/groups according to > http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ecl1/papers/rbac99.pdf. > For example, there're 3 hierarchical roles: > -R1 > --R1.1 > --R1.2 > with persmissions: > grand R1 { permission P1 } > grand R1.1 { permission P2 } > grand R1.2 { permission P3 } > > By a generalisation hierarchy ("is a"-hierarchy): > R1 has [P1] > R1 has [P1,P2] > R1 has [P1,P3] > > and by a agrregation hierarchy ("part of") > R1 has [P1,P2,P3] > R1 has [P2] > R1 has [P3]. > > What type of hierarchy will be supported? Does it > make any sence to support different types? > > Regards, > Artem > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
