RE: RE: PCLS classes deprecated in PCELS

I would like to second this approach.  We have implemented a hardware-based
solution using the existing PCIM schema, and with our goal to be following
this standard as much as possible.  Our experience with deprecating schema,
especially within the scope of LDAP, is that it is not a "good thing". While
we would like to strive to adopt PCIMe and PCLS for some of the extensions
that it brings, we would be hard-pressed to adopt such a sweeping change as
currently submitted.  I believe, that with Ryan's suggestions, the ability
to extend an existing implementation from PCIM would be more approachable
than in its current form.

rgds,
d.


-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Moats [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 10:38 AM
To: Pana, Mircea
Cc: '[email protected]'
Subject: Re: [Policy] RE: PCLS classes deprecated in PCELS


On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 08:19:55AM -0500, Pana, Mircea wrote:
| Bert,
|  
| Since we have heard opinions on this issue from two people so far (Larry
and
| Ryan, I'd like to thank you for taking the time to do that) I felt that it
| would be helpful to give a detailed presentation of the reasons. I would
| love to hear more opinions from the authors of the other documents
produced
| by this group. Are they still around?
| Does anybody have running code based on PCIM, PCLS, PCIMe? Does anybody
else
| have an opinion?

I have running code that uses PolicyRule and PolicyRule.Priority quite
happily through subclasses, so I really don't see the need to deprecate it.

Ryan


_______________________________________________
Policy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy