John,
OK, now that I understand the union, how should we handle the
upper bound applied to the insteadOf field? As it's written
right now, the list of names is bounded by ub-insteadOf, with
a value of 16 decimal. Suppose the union of the two lists
produces a list with more than 16 elements. What gets
truncated?
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: John Pawling [SMTP:jsp(_at_)jgvandyke(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, February 20, 1998 11:27 AM
To: 'IETF S/MIME'
Subject: Re: ESS-02 MLA Receipt Policies
Scott,
Yes.
================================
John Pawling
jsp(_at_)jgvandyke(_dot_)com
J.G. Van Dyke & Associates, Inc.
================================
Now I need to understand something about the intended union of the
policies. Consider this case:
A's policy is insteadOf, and B's policy is inAdditionTo. The table
says the union is insteadOf(A+B). Does this mean the effective policy
is the union of A's insteadOf names and B's inAdditionTo names to yield
insteadOf(insteadOf(A) + inAdditionTo(B))? I know there aren't any other
names available, but the table entry makes it look like there should be
insteadOf names for B.
----->
Scott Hollenbeck (mailto:hollenbe(_at_)east(_dot_)xsis(_dot_)xerox(_dot_)com)
Xerox Special Information Systems
Arlington, Virginia, USA