Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Replace security fields with hashtable

From: Stephen Smalley (sds@private)
Date: Wed Oct 27 2004 - 06:22:22 PDT 

On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 09:18, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> No, I have not tried the hybrid approach James suggested.  I'm certainly
> not opposed to that, but does anyone think (as I my feeling was) that
> such a thing would be rejected?  It seemed clear to me that providing a
> hashtable would mean the ->security fields would be ripped out.

It seems clear to me that a hashtable approach is a regression and
would/should be rejected.  builtin, chaining, or hybrid are the only
options AFAICS.

-- 
Stephen Smalley <sds@private>
National Security Agency

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Wed Oct 27 2004 - 06:26:09 PDT