On Nov 22, 2008, at 10:30 AM, Erik Rissanen wrote:
> Currently obligations contain only static attribute assignments. If we
> would change the schema so we also allow an Expression in the
> obligation, the content of the obligation which is returned could be
> dynamically generated and you could select the correct role into it in
> your policy.
>
> I am cross posting this to the TC mailing list. I think it would be a
> good idea to allow dynamic obligations in 3.0. I suspect it would
> solve
> the issue John was talking about on the last call, and it would solve
> David's use case. And I think it would be a very useful feature in
> general, with little cost since a PDP implementation has to be able to
> evaluate expressions anyway.
I agree. This seems like the most pragmatic approach to resolving a
number of issues involving decisions that require more than a binary
response.
b
