Re: Challenge: Find potential use cases for non-trivial confinement

[Jonathan S. Shapiro]

On Thu, 2006-05-18 at 19:17 +0200, Pierre THIERRY wrote:
> Scribit Bas Wijnen dies 18/05/2006 hora 14:29:
> > However, I don't see how any other definition could make sense. You
> > say the parent is the one which provides the storage.  Why not the one
> > which provides the CPU time?  Or any other resource?
> 
> That's a misunderstanding, sorry. I say the parent is the one which
> provides all base resources, like storage and scheduling.

I suggest that we should avoid the term "parent", because it seems to
have nothing to do with the issue at hand.

Rationale:

It appears to me that the discussion of transparency is not tied to
parent/child relationships. It is instead tied to resource
relationships.

For example: A has a space bank. A gives it to B in opaque form (which B
agrees to accept). B uses it to create C. A can now inspect C, because A
has transparent access to the resource.

A is not the parent (or the requester) of C, and may be a peer of B
(therefore not a parent). But A can still inspect C.


shap