- From: Fabian Ritzmann <Fabian.Ritzmann@Sun.COM>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 13:13:57 +0200
- To: "public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
- Message-id: <45A4CA75.7050900@Sun.COM>
We would like to get this issue logged for V.Next.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4179
Title
Preferences for policy expressions
Description
For V.Next, WS-Policy should consider how to handle preferences. Earlier
attempts to apply preferences to WS-Policy was using an absolute scale
where there was no guarantee that two policy providers were using the
same scale. Therefore preferences must be relative to one policy
document. For V.Next, WS-Policy should either supply 1) a mechanism to
indicate relative preferences or 2) a standard preference XML attribute
for policy assertions. Priority is a synonym for preference in the
context of this document.
Justification
Preferences can be used by policy providers to indicate to policy
consumers which policy assertions are preferred. This is particularly
relevant in scenarios where a policy consumer chooses policies
automatically without human interaction. For example, three encryption
algorithms may be supported, but one is extremely slow but uses minimal
memory and is available for use by memory-constrained clients. This
example also shows that policy consumers may have their own set of
preferences that can override the preferences of the policy provider.
Target
WS-Policy Framework V.Next
Proposal
Several approaches may be considered:
1. Stating document order in a Policy indicates preferences would be
sufficient. Determine if the WG would need to resolve any
contradiction to the current rule that no policy elements are
ordered.
2. Policy alternatives could be associated with identifiers. A policy
metadata syntax could list identifiers in preference order.
3. An XML attribute that contains relative preference numbers to
include in assertion elements. The preference or priority would
apply only to the immediate level [1]
<http://wikihome.sfbay.sun.com/wts/Wiki.jsp?page=PolicySpecIssuePreferences#ref-PolicySpecIssuePreferences-1>.
XPath may be used to examine or select portions of a WS-Policy
instance for analysis, transformation or other uses. To contain
this, options at the same level without explicit preference
indications could be assumed to be equivalent [2]
<http://wikihome.sfbay.sun.com/wts/Wiki.jsp?page=PolicySpecIssuePreferences#ref-PolicySpecIssuePreferences-2>.
This would enable non-normalized policies where preferences may
not be attached consistently [3]
<http://wikihome.sfbay.sun.com/wts/Wiki.jsp?page=PolicySpecIssuePreferences#ref-PolicySpecIssuePreferences-3>.
4. Domains could provide a proprietary means of expressing
preferences. This has already been detected in the security arena,
e.g. <AlgorithmSpeed>slow</AlgorithmSpeed> could be included under
the same <All> operator as the slow encryption algorithm. However,
as this should be a mechanism that cuts across domains, this is
not an optimal or interoperable approach.
In order to effectively handle intersections and merge, this proposal
could be extended to include concrete algorithms. Nested policies must
be considered. A standard algorithm for a policy consumer is required to
compute the most preferred policy alternative.
[#1]
<All Preference="6">
<ExactlyOne>
<All Preference="3">
<Assertion1 />
</All>
<All Preference="2">
<Assertion2 />
</All>
</ExactlyOne>
</All>
<All Preference="1">
<Assertion3 />
</All>
Which would be normalized into three alternatives (sorted according to
preference):
<All>
<Assertion3 />
</All>
<All>
<Assertion2 />
</All>
<All>
<Assertion1 />
</All>
would have the following preference order:
* Assertion3
* Assertion2
* Assertion1
[#2] The WG may specify a default, possibly with a Policy attribute to
override, to indicate whether options without explicit preference
indications are considered and at what preference. Note, this is similar
to any recommendation that may be made to WS-Addressing. See draft:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-policy/2006Oct/0002.html.
[#3] More than one attribute may be needed or the capability to acquire
the value of this attribute. We recognize this may need more discussion.
--
Fabian Ritzmann
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Stella Business Park Phone +358-9-525 562 96
Lars Sonckin kaari 12 Fax +358-9-525 562 52
02600 Espoo Email Fabian.Ritzmann@Sun.COM
Finland
Received on Wednesday, 10 January 2007 11:13:57 UTC