[Boldon James classification: UNMARKED EXTERNAL] Hi, Just a few notes on this: 1. Throughout: It's primarily written from a "Need to Know" basis i.e. don't show people stuff they aren't cleared for. I'd prefer to see equal emphasis on a "Need to Share" basis i.e. let people know there is something there but they currently don't have clearance. In a PubSub environment I think this makes more sense than randomly (at least it will seem random to the subscriber) filtering out stuff. Section 9.1 <insufficient_clearance> touches upon this but I'd prefer to see this mentioned throughout the document. 2. Section 2: "A client SHOULD only publish items to a node that are compatible with the Clearance of the node", why is this not "A client MUST NOT publish items to a node that are incompatible with the Clearance of the node" 3. Example 14: I'm struggling to think of a scenario where a notification without a payload needs a security label (this is a SECRET notification of Britain winning a Gold medal but this is an UNCLASSIFIED notification of Britain winning a Gold medal seems a little odd). If I'm cleared to subscribe to the node then.... 4. Section 9: I think the draft hints at all the possible complexities here. Perhaps this XEP should limit itself to label based access at the node level only??
Piers -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ashley Ward Sent: 19 June 2012 17:58 To: XMPP Standards Subject: Re: [Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Security Labels in PubSub Yeah - sorry about that! I had two copies of it on my file system and of course sod's law meant that I sent the wrong one! Thanks to Peter for updating it! --- Ash On 19/06/2012 17:47, "Todd Herman" <[email protected]> wrote: >I was going to say. There were no periods and parts had "blah blah blah" >in it. :) > >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >Behalf Of Peter Saint-Andre >Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 12:34 PM >To: XMPP Standards >Subject: Re: [Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Security Labels in >PubSub > >The authors had sent me an outdated version. I've pushed a revised >version to the website. > >On 6/19/12 10:17 AM, XMPP Extensions Editor wrote: >> The XMPP Extensions Editor has received a proposal for a new XEP. >> >> Title: Security Labels in PubSub >> >> Abstract: This document describes an extension to XEP-0258 (Security >>Labels in XMPP) to allow for the use of security labels in PubSub. >>This document describes >> how security label metadata can be applied to the various elements >>within PubSub, including nodes and items. >> >> URL: http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/pubsub-labels.html >> >> The XMPP Council will decide in the next two weeks whether to accept >>this proposal as an official XEP. >> > Email classified by Boldon James Classifier - www.boldonjames.com
