policy model Q, SARuleInPolicyGroup::GroupComponent

Hi,

In the policy model, 4.7.2 :

>4.7. The Aggregation Class SARuleInPolicyGroup 
>    
>   The class SARuleInPolicyGroup associates a SARule with the 
>   IPsecPolicyGroup that contains it.  The class definition for 
>   SARuleInPolicyGroup is as follows: 
> 
>   NAME         SARuleInPolicyGroup 
>   DESCRIPTION  Associates a SARule with the IPsecPolicyGroup that 
>                contains it. 
>   DERIVED FROM PolicySetComponent (see [PCIME]) 
>   ABSTRACT     FALSE 
>   PROPERTIES   Priority (from PolicySetComponent) 
>                GroupComponent [ref IPsecPolicyGroup [1..1]] 
>                PartComponent [ref SARule [0..n]] 
>                 
>   Note: an implementation can easily partition the set of SARules 
>   aggregated by a SARuleInPolicyGroup instance into one IKERule 
>   instances subset and into one IPsecRule instances subset based on the 
>   class type of the component instances (being either IKERule or 
>   IPsecRule instances). 
>    
>4.7.1. The Property Priority 
> 
>   For a description of this property, see [PCIME]. 
> 
>4.7.2. The Reference GroupComponent 
>    
>   The property GroupComponent is inherited from PolicyRuleInPolicyGroup 
>   and is overridden to refer to an IPsecPolicyGroup instance.  The 
>   [1..1] cardinality indicates that a SARule instance may be contained 
>   in one and only one IPsecPolicyGroup instance (i.e., SARules are not 
>   shared across IPsecPolicyGroups). 


The GroupComponent explicitly states that SARules are not sharable
between IPsecPolicyGroups. I couldn't think of any reason for this
restriction and it seems arbitrarily limiting. So, basically, I wanted
to know what are the reasons for choosing a 1..1 cardinality here (as
opposed to say, 0..n or 1..n)?

thanks,
Mike

-- 
Michael Baer
[email protected]
NAI Labs