RE: [xdi] Link Contract Document

From
Barnhill William <>
Date
2005-11-10T03:10:58+00:00
ID
Thread
RE: [xdi] Link Contract Document
The doc looks interesting. At 
first blush I'll note a few things:

 

1. The details on policy representation are 
interesting, but I'd be against creating our own schema when we can reuse an 
existing one that's further along in the standards process..be it XACML or 
something else. I will flesh out my ideas on a XACML/DSA union and distill them 
into a posted doc before the next telecon. I'm also still wondering if there's a 
benefit to leveraging xlink, combined with XACML, in here somewhere. 

 

2. I LIKE the idea of steering clear of 
link contracts as a term. Jamie Clark was the one that first sent up a flag on 
this and I think his points still very valid, contract denotes enforceable and 
legally binding, which a digital document in itself cannot be right now. 
Agreement is a softer term, but conveys the same basic meaning, so I'd propose 
we adopt Andy's DSA (Data Sharing Agreement) as the std term for what we've 
referred to as a Link Contract.

 

3. I think we need a set of XDI 
authorization services that encapsulate policy retrieval, policy update, and 
policy enforcement and I'd like those services (and others) to be as xri-centric 
(x-centric ?) as possible. There seems to be a correlation between REST urls and 
a DataWeb version of REST that uses XRIs. A very rough example of which is the 
policy retrieval mechanism I mentioned in the previous email, where you create 
an XRI from a $policy template that combines the i-name of the subject, the 
action, and the target of the action.  This XRI would return a policy 
fragment in the schema we adopt, such as XACML or whatever.

 

4. I don't like the idea of treating the 
XDI resources controlled as attributes of a DSA, or even of the DSA that 
expresses the controlling policy being an attribute of the resource being 
controlled. For me the policy is an attribute of an arc between the accessor's 
i-name and the resource being acted on. There could be multiple arcs, one for 
each type of action, or one overall access arc.  I'd also suggest giving 
some though to the distinction of policy control based on i-name versus policy 
control based on i-number. For example, a person may have rights to data 
they access while wearing a particular hat and an org may need to make 
it clear that they only have access to that data when they are representing that 
community by accessing that data using that's communities i-name.  
Essentially they can only access the data while using the org's resources, which 
has legal ramifications and could be very important.

 

More thoughts later,

 

=Bill.Barnhill

 

From:  
[mailto:]
Sent: Wed 11/9/2005 9:02 PM
To: 
Drummond Reed
Cc: 'XDI TC'; Geoffrey Strongin; Owen Davis; Robin 
Cover
Subject: RE: [xdi] Link Contract Document

Sorry about the confusion folks... I have 
deleted the Link Contract document with the privacy statement  (twice) and 
uploaded one with it stripped. 

I 
will try not to do it again :-) 

Andy 
Dale
ooTao

Phone: 877-213-7935
Fax: 877-213-7935

i-name: 
=Andy.Dale
http://public.xdi.org/=andy.dale

***************************************************************************
If 
you don't have your iName yet use this link:

  
http://2idi.com/registrar/index.html?referral_code=ootao

***************************************************************************

  
  

    "Drummond Reed" 
      <> 
      
11/09/2005 06:24 PM 

    
      
        
        

          
            
To

          <>, "'XDI TC'" 
            <> 
        

          
            
cc

          
        

          
            
Subject

          RE: [xdi] Link Contract 
            Document

      
        
        

          
          

Thank you, Andy. All OASIS XDI TC document 
repositories are public, so effectively the information is public now anyway. 
But it is always best to remove any "proprietary and confidential" notices 
priort to posting if you can. 
  
Thanks, 

  
=Drummond 
  

From:  
[mailto:] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 5:04 
PM
To: 'XDI TC'
Subject: [xdi] Link Contract Document 

  

Owen pointed out that the document I posted has a privacy statement 
that precludes non-listed people from reading it. It does say that people can 
read it if they have explicit written permission. This email is explicit written 
permission for members and observers of the XDI TC to read the document....does 
that cover it? 

Andy Dale
ooTao

Phone: 877-213-7935
Fax: 
877-213-7935

i-name: 
=Andy.Dale
http://public.xdi.org/=andy.dale

***************************************************************************
If 
you don't have your iName yet use this 
link:

 http://2idi.com/registrar/index.html?referral_code=ootao

***************************************************************************