[cap-talk] VOC <-> DAC distinction (was: RE: In defense of P-1935)
capability at webstart.com
Sun Feb 3 04:11:28 EST 2008
At 07:18 PM 2/2/2008, Karp, Alan H wrote:
> > You can just
> > use your discretion to do any needed delegations
> > through the Horton PDP.
> > Isn't this a DAC without MAC situation where
> > I don't need to know the policy to avoid
> > violating it? Isn't it in fact Voluntary
> > Oblivious Compliance? The above thinking is
> > why to me VOC is a subset of DAC - essentially
> > a nice property of a DAC.
>Not by my definition.
I'm a little confused what you are referring to above.
>If the delegator is not confined, it's VOC.
That's the case I thought I defined:
>At 05:39 PM 2/2/2008, Jed Donnelley wrote:
>>You can just
>>use your discretion to do any needed delegations
>>through the Horton PDP.
Not? Since the delegator isn't confined (i.e. has
opportunities to delegate other than through the
Horton tunnel), then I consider the above a DAC
without MAC situation. The delegator isn't confined,
so, as you say, isn't it VOC - at least when the
Horton tunnel is used?
>If the delegator is confined, then it's DAC with MAC.
>If there's nobody to block the delegation or prevent use of the
>delegated right, it's DAC without MAC.
I think I understand, though as I say, the terminology
does sometime seems a bit slippery to me. I just wonder
if you could clarify for me whether or not you consider
optionally delegating through Horton tunnels as VOC or
More information about the cap-talk