Seth Proctor wrote:
>On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 12:04, Kuketayev, Argyn (Contractor) wrote:
>
>
>>I think it just gives the policy writer a little more control on the
>>evaluation sequence, which may impact the performance of the system.
>>
>>
>
>That's the right idea. The ordered algorithm requires that the elements
>be evaluated in order, while the non-ordered version makes no such
>requirement. In practice, most systems I know of still evaluate in
>order, but if you wanted to change the order for performance reasons (or
>for any other reason), you can with the non-ordered version.
>
>
one more reason to want to have the policies evaluated in a particular
order is obligations. obligations in the response can be different
depending on the order of evaluation of policies.
argyn
