--UugvWAfsgieZRqgk
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 03:43:03PM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> > So then what name do you propose? security.bsd.?
>=20
> I probably did not pay attention close enough for the start of this threa=
d or
> have memory swapped out, but I fail to understand the "bsd" part in this
> name. Can someone explain it? Are we going to see a "security.linux" node
> someday? Why not just "security"?

I agree with Steve that we should find out why FreeBSD chose this name.

I do not think we will see "linux", but I expect we will see other values.

I think the reason we want something here, and not "security", is that=20
this describes features/attributes/controls that are based on a UID/GID-
centered security model.

If we got with an ACL-based model or an attribute-based model, then I=20
would expect us to have other nodes under security related to policy for=20
them. I also understand FreeBSD has a "jail" section under "security".

Take care,

Bill

--UugvWAfsgieZRqgk
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFDFIRrWz+3JHUci9cRAm8aAKCGLR538uibWHkz68RnTLyO3MQoPwCgh1zD
D4wZ8Sy0zwqU2XXkoYIBs2A=
=tFRQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--UugvWAfsgieZRqgk--