[cap-talk] [e-lang] A Taxonomy of Current Object-Cap Systems

Jed Donnelley capability at webstart.com
Thu Mar 5 04:09:24 EST 2009


At 03:21 AM 3/4/2009, Toby Murray wrote:
>..
>The list omits caps-as-data systems in which objects can handle the bits
>of a cap-as-data directly, such as the E sturdyref part and Webkeys.

Just for my curiosity, why did you make the above choice?  It seems
odd to me.  What does the implementation of the capability mechanism
mean to you for the purposes of this taxonomy?

>Partitioned password-capability systems (like Annex) are, however,
>included.

Again, why?  I can of course understand the focus on current systems,
but I'd be interested to know what sort of a functional) a criteria would
be used to chose between capabilities as data systems (e.g. I think
Amoeba fits this criteria and is still available if not actively
supported:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amoeba_distributed_operating_system
http://www.cs.vu.nl/pub/amoeba/

) and systems that use capabilities as descriptors, whether
partitioned password-capabilities or otherwise.

Why not simply include all current capability systems?  It seems
to me that such a taxonomy would be considerably more useful and
not much more difficult to put together - e.g. for your thesis.

--Jed  http://www.webstart.com/jed-signature.html 



More information about the cap-talk mailing list