(not for usage questions);
> openstack-operat...@lists.openstack.org
> *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] 2017-1-11 policy meeting
>
>
>
> Looping this into the operator's list, too!
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Lance Bragstad
> wrote:
>
>
janvier 2017 23:16
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions);
openstack-operat...@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] 2017-1-11 policy meeting
Looping this into the operator's list, too!
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Lance Bragstad
mailto:l
Looping this into the operator's list, too!
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Lance Bragstad wrote:
> Thanks to Morgan in today's policy meeting [0], we were able to shed some
> light on the reasons for keystone having two policy files. The main reason
> a second policy file was introduced was to
Thanks to Morgan in today's policy meeting [0], we were able to shed some
light on the reasons for keystone having two policy files. The main reason
a second policy file was introduced was to recenter RBAC around concepts
introduced in the V3 API. The problem was that the policy file that came
late
Hey folks,
In case you missed the policy meeting today, we had a good discussion [0]
around incorporating keystone's policy into code using the Nova approach.
Keystone is in a little bit of a unique position since we maintain two
different policy files [1] [2], and there were a lot of questions a
