> >Well, in order to overhaul the current authentication, role and
> >granting system, I guess we should make a list of requirements
> >and ideas and then reimplement or deprecate ROLEs whatsoever.
> >There are quite a lot of ideas about database-users, groups, roles
> >etc etc...
> >
> >
> Absolutely. Collect requirements as abstractly as possible, scope the
> competition, listen to users.

Well, there is/has been quite some talk about a new security
system. Has anything been written down yet? ( I guess you
should know from fb-devel or the Fb-admins?)

> >On a server basis, I must admit that I also like the users to be
> >able to connect from a given set of hosts instead of free for
> >all etc... (see MySQL, but hey, they were born in web-apps).
> >
> That's a different issue. Netfrastructure supports coteries. A coterie
> is a named collection of ip addresses or domain names. A database
> account (user) can specify a named coterie. Come in from the wrong IP
> and the password won't do you any good.

Sounds pretty similar. Also sounds useful for future security
development, don't you think? (well, I guess you do, as you've
implemented it in NFS).

> >>But gosh, if the SQL standards committee ever recognized that databases
> >>are used to drive web applications, it might dawn on them that
> >>multi-table free form text search is the foundation of the world wide

web.

> >
> >And what do you propose for this as a standard solution? ;-)
> >
> That's something Netfrastructure does quite nicely, thank you.

I might recall discussing this a bit in Fulda ;-)

> If they're interested, they're free to come look. Ann and I both
> represented DEC on various standards committees. If you get involved
> with one, you will discover that "useful" and "good" are not among their
> core values. I rest my case on SQL triggers. Ugh.

*g*

With regards,

Martijn Tonies
Database Workbench - developer tool for InterBase, Firebird, MySQL & MS SQL
Server.
Upscene Productions
http://www.upscene.com