Hello Sung,

thanks for sharing this!

I'd definitely be interested in seeing your ideas for the proposal.
Especially your point about field-id binding had me thinking — since admins
author against names and never see field-ids today, it'd be worth spelling
out where and when that name→field-id binding happens, and how it handles
drop+re-add.

I think a number of interesting points are worth discussing such as
coexistence with external policy engines and separation of duties on
commit, while still keeping the field-id binding intact where it applies.

Looking forward to it!

Best,
Christian

On Fri, 5 Jun 2026 at 22:59, Sung Yun <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> The FGAC / Read Restriction proposal [1] is introducing a read-side path
> to standardize how we describe row filters and masks, and to do it safely
> across schema evolution by binding them to field-ids. We don't yet have
> anything matching on the write path.
>
> Today, policies are administered entirely outside the REST protocol, so
> external systems reference columns by name, as they're not part of the
> commit and never see field-ids. And two things break once schema and policy
> have to change together:
> - a policy bound to a column name silently re-targets when the column is
> renamed
> - a policy commits separately from the schema change it depends on, so a
> column can exist before its protection does
>
> So far, policy administration has been left out of scope [2], and now that
> the Read Restrictions Proposal is finding consensus, I believe it is a good
> time to start thinking about it on the write path.
> I have a rough direction in mind, of enabling co-committing policy and
> binding it to field-ids on the server-side. So I wanted to gauge:
> 1. whether people see this as a gap worth closing in the IRC protocol
> 2. whether there are concerns or considerations that should be taken into
> account
>
> If there's interest, I'm happy to put together a detailed proposal and
> share it here for discussion.
>
> Sung
>
> [1]
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/108Y0E8XsZi91x-UY0_aHLEbmXDNmxmS5BnDjunEKvTM/edit?tab=t.7l861fq8jo38
> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/2jx33fn7lq37oxxm7sd6rjy0dnvbm4t6
>

Reply via email to