Re: [yaco-liaison-tool] The liaison tool: Status Update

"Emilio A. Sánchez" <> Thu, 07 April 2011 09:24 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2ECC3A69F7 for <>; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 02:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.96
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.96 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.143, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_RFC_BOGUSMX=1.482, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SPWd-GLUJk+p for <>; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 02:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9CC53A69EE for <>; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 02:24:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fxm15 with SMTP id 15so1752148fxm.31 for <>; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 02:26:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id d10mr639370fan.21.1302168399548; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 02:26:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ([]) by with ESMTPS id 21sm418113fav.41.2011. (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 07 Apr 2011 02:26:38 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 11:26:49 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Emilio_A=2E_S=E1nchez=22?= <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv: Gecko/20110223 Thunderbird/3.1.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc:, Eliot Lear <>, Ray Pelletier <>
Subject: Re: [yaco-liaison-tool] The liaison tool: Status Update
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of the Yaco / Liaison Statement Management Tool Project details <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 09:24:56 -0000

El 07/04/11 11:19, Patrik Fältström escribió:
> On 7 apr 2011, at 11.08, Emilio A. Sánchez wrote:
>>> The important thing is to be able to update the liaisons. And we can trust our (IETF) liaisons, so to get fine-grained access rights is not so important. The ability to get things right in the database is. Having bad data in the database -- as now -- is not working in the long(er) run.
>>    I suppose, as I said in my previous mail, that the problem is who can 'take care' (mark as done) a liaison. Right now this action can be done by anyone whose email is listed in the liaison. But probably I should add the people that can edit the liaison to the ones that can 'take care' of it.
> That imply that someone from ITU-T that is the receiver of a liaison can log in an edit an outgoing liaison that they receive... "interesting feature"...
> You have an access right already today when one add a liaison, right? That access algorithm say whether you as a user can add certain data in the to/from fields.

    No, no, no. He can use the button "Take care of" (the one that 
appears in the detail of a liaison next to 'No actions taken') cause he 
(as a receiver) can now if the liaison has been taken care.

    People who can edit a liaison are:

    * The secretariat (always)
    * A Liaison Manager with these conditions:
       * For outgoing liaisons: If the liaison was sent to its SDO
       * For incoming liaisons: If the liaison was sent from its SDO

> 1. An external party, for example someone from ITU SG2, should only be able to add a liaison that is incoming to IETF from SG2, but with various receivers on the IETF side.
> 2. An internal party, for example liaison to ITU-T SG2, should only be able to add liaisons to or from IETF and that external party.
> 3. An internal party that has power gloves, like the liaison to ITU-T should be like (2) but for more SG's than one
> 4. Secretariat should be able to access everything
> Easiest way of course for 1, 2 and 3 is to have the ability for each user to map that to one relationship, and whether the access is incoming or outgoing. For example:
> A. A user have access to some external groups (zero or more).
> B. If the user is _incoming_ then the user can only add incoming liaisons.
> C. If the user is _outgoing_ then the user can add incoming, outgoing liaisons AND edit the liaisons.
> But once again, I am not so worried about giving people "too much access" to start with, because we have had problems for years with having not enough access in the tool.
> So lets start with what you now have created! Sounds fine!
>     Patrik