Fw: problem with conformance tests

Satoshi Hada

IBM Tokyo Research Laboratory 

mailto:

----- Forwarded by Satoshi
Hada/Japan/IBM on 2004/03/24 10:07 -----

Seth Proctor <>

2004/03/24 00:39

To

Satoshi Hada/Japan/IBM@IBMJP

cc

Subject

Re: problem with conformance
tests

Hi Satoshi. Thank you for your response. Could you please forward this
email

to the comment list, since I seem to be having trouble with it.

> The problem is that there is no detailed description about

> <AttributeAssignment> in the XACML 1.0 spec.

> Anyway, I'll ask Kudo-san to correct the testcases according to your
comment.

I absolutely agree that there is no detail in the spec. This is a real
issue.

The problem, of course, is that the PDP is supposed to ignore what's in
the

assignments, so it's hard to talk about the correct format :) In this case,

because AttributeAssignment _is_ an AttributeValue, I believe you have
to

follow the definition of AttributeValue to get the correct behavior. Maybe
I'll

suggest some new language for XACML 2.0 to describe this...

A separate problem here is that I'm not sure string should be used the
way

it's being used in these examples (ie, as a container for complex content).
I

raised this issue once before, but never heard any comments back. I think
I'll

try raising it again.

 

> Is there any meeting minutes on the agreement.

> I'm asking because we should mention it (if any) in the test case
description.

I can't seem to find them now, but I know I had this discussion at some

point. I'll see what I can find.

seth