Issue 554:  Policy types defined in B.9.2 pertain to Security (sec-rev)
Source:  (, )
Nature:  Uncategorized
Severity: 
Summary: Summary: Is there a problem in moving the const declarations out of CORBA module and into Security module?

Resolution:  resolved, close issue
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
April 24, 1997: received issue
March 26, 1998: closed issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====
Return-Path: <daemon>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 18:29:35 -0400
From: Jishnu Mukerji <jis@fpk.hp.com>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard New Jersey Labs
Subject: A few things to think about
Errors-To: owner-sec-rev
Sender: owner-sec-rev
X-OMG: sec-rev
To: sec-rev

Following up on some discussions that we have had with the Core RTF
folks two items were identified that need to be passed by the Security
RTF. They are:



(3) All the policy types defined in B.9.2 pertain to Security. Is there
a problem in moving the const declarations out of the CORBA module and
into the Security module? Reduces the random jmble of stuff in the CORBA
module.