Next in thread →
Next in month →
RE: [ws-rx] Updated proposal for (as yet) unumbered issue: Need fault to indicate that security constraints have been violated
If the RM layer doesn't know
about security constraints why did it include a STR in the CreateSequence
message? What did the RM layer think it was doing by adding the UseSequenceSTR
header to the SOAP envelope?
- gp
From: Anthony Nadalin
[mailto:]
Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2006 6:54
PM
To: Gilbert Pilz
Cc:
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Updated proposal for
(as yet) unumbered issue: Need fault to indicate that security constraints
have been violated
RM does not know about any security constraints so I have no idea how RM
can throw this, as this would have to come from the security processing or
policy processing
Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell
512.289.4122
'
src="gif00094.gif" width=16 border=0>"Gilbert Pilz"
<>
"Gilbert Pilz"
<>
07/30/2006 05:48 PM
To
<>
cc
Subject
[ws-rx] Updated proposal for (as yet) unumbered issue: Need
fault to indicate that security constraints have been
violated
Attached
is an updated proposal for the security fault issue. It is
provided in the
form of a change-bar version of wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-15. The
changes are
against the 7/28 version of the document (#44 in Kavi's list
of
revisions).
There are three additions to the spec. Section 4.10 has
been added to
describe the wsrm:SecurityViolation fault. A paragraph has
been added to
section 6.1 that describes when the fault may be used. A
similar
parapgraph has been added to section 6.2 to describe the possible
use of
the fault when protecting a Sequence using SSL/TLS.
-
gp
[attachment "wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-15.pdf" deleted by Anthony
Nadalin/Austin/IBM]
Next in thread →
Next in month →