From 92a17a9be9b4bf96df5bcb6dc48069a1b9c42097 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "W. Trevor King" Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 22:23:53 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] runtime: Drop "Barring access control concerns" This wording landed without comment as part of 7117ede7 (Expand on the definition of our ops, 2015-10-13, #225). However, I'm not entirely clear on the exception it's making. It may be trying to say something like: Just because you were authorized to manage that container when you created it doesn't mean you're still authorized to perform operation X on it now. Maybe you've lost privileges in the meantime. But as far as compliance testing is concerned, the same test harness will be calling 'create' and the subsequent operations. That harness will be reporting MUST violations if the runtime refuses a subsequent operation, and removing the access-control loophole makes it more obvious that the runtime's refusal is non-compliant. Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King --- runtime.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/runtime.md b/runtime.md index 4786848a0..e2c7a2f4c 100644 --- a/runtime.md +++ b/runtime.md @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ ## Scope of a Container -Barring access control concerns, the entity using a runtime to create a container MUST be able to use the operations defined in this specification against that same container. +The entity using a runtime to create a container MUST be able to use the operations defined in this specification against that same container. Whether other entities using the same, or other, instance of the runtime can see that container is out of scope of this specification. ## State