Subject: RE: Proposed Changes to PKINIT

From: "Friedrichs, Paul LCDR" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 15:44:08 -0500

True. Unfortunately, the DoD has a few million people walking around with
credentials, and there are countless access control lists that rely on names
to track users. 

Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicolas Williams [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 3:14 PM
....
> From an administrator's point of view, flat namespaces are 
> nothing but a headache.

---

From: Nicolas Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 15:54:18 -0500

Yes. Users like flat namespaces, and I don't blame them nor do I want to
take those away. I should explain what I meant below a bit further: I
work at a bank, one that has been through countless mergers and
acquisitions over the last decade and, in my experience, hierarchical
namespaces make the technology aspect of the merger much easier even if
in time a cleanup is done to end up with a single flat namespace.

So, what I'm advocating is not that namespaces be hierarchical, but that
the option be available, because there are times when hierarchical
namespaces can really simplify things.

Nico

--