- From: Sergey Beryozkin <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 16:45:45 +0100
- To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, "Ashok Malhotra" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>, <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
Hi Dave I'm confused :-). WSAddressing empty nested <Policy> does not match the more qualified WSA nested Policy by design, but this suggestion will make it match in a generic fashion even though by design it can't match... Cheers, Sergey ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com> To: "Sergey Beryozkin" <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>; "Ashok Malhotra" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>; <public-ws-policy@w3.org> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 4:37 PM Subject: RE: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions It's exactly intended to solve that kind of use case. The caveat is that I'm not sure how much of a performance/scalability problem there is with WS-Addressing... Cheers, Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 5:05 AM > To: Ashok Malhotra; David Orchard; public-ws-policy@w3.org > Subject: Re: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems > with expressing allowable nested policy assertions > > Hi > > Will it work with the WSAddressing nested <Policy> and say > <Policy><NoNAnonymousResponse/></Policy> ? > > The above two nesetd policies don't intersect, but if either > of the options below is used then the above options will > intersect...unless I'm missing something > > Cheers, Sergey > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ashok Malhotra" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> > To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>; <public-ws-policy@w3.org> > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 12:53 PM > Subject: RE: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems > with expressing allowable nested policy assertions > > > > +1 > > All the best, Ashok > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy- > > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Orchard > > Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 5:26 PM > > To: public-ws-policy@w3.org > > Subject: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems > with expressing > > allowable nested policy assertions > > > > > > The policy intersection algorithm results in policy assertions with > > nesting to > > be verbosely expressed with all of the possible nested > assertions marked > > as > > optional="true". One example of this is SecurityPolicy with X509, > > detailed in > > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007May/0 > 160.html. > > > > > > The scalability problem is that it may be difficult to list > and exchange > > all > > the possible nested assertions. The performance problem is > that such a > > scale > > may result in slow policy processers performing intersection. > > > > One counter-arguments are that the number of nested > assertions is not > > large > > enough to warrant this optimization, and that the > optimization of adding > > optional="true" is sufficient. The general argument of premature > > optimization > > applies. This would be a close with no action or defer to v.Next. > > > > Proposal 1: > > Update the policy intersection algorithm so that an empty policy > > assertion > > matches a policy assertion with a nested assertion > resulting an the same > > policy > > assertion with a nested assertion. > > > > Proposal 2: > > Provide an explicit wildcard to match any nested assertions. > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2007 15:45:12 UTC