At 12:51 PM 7/8/2003, Tom Rutt wrote:
>Alan Weissberger wrote:
>I would prefer to go ahead with the call, and give a special "excused" absence
>to people who go on an inteligence gathering mission in Redmond during our
>conference meeting.
>Perhaps you could arrange for a small room with call in for those who are
>together
>in Redmond.
I agree. I think it's a bad idea to cancel the call. We all have had to
step out of f2f's for con calls. In the past, it hasn't been a problem to
get a conf room. Guess we'll see how harmonious things really are.
>Anyway, who will be able to attend the Tuesday Teleconference?
I will. If i have to stand outside on my cell phone. 'course i'm used to it :-)
>I am able to attend and run the meeting.
>
>Please respond either if you know you will or know you will not atttend on
>tuesday.
>
>Changing dates is not a good Idea. There are too many people with
>schedule calls at various
>times.
>
>Tom Rutt
>WSRM Chair
>
>PS, If there were some comments from that group to be discussed on changes
>to our
>WS-Reliability requirements and spec to avoid "collisions" with their
>architecture, we could
>vote to let the experts at that meeting to Join our call for discussion
>purposes.
I would encourage people who are concerned to JOIN the TC and contribute
that way, and have a clear understanding of the groundrules.
jeff
>>Tom
>>
>>In the interests of harmony and peace, I suggest postponing the call.
>>How about later the same week?
>>
>>alan
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Tom Rutt <>
>>Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 09:34:48 -0400
>>To: Doug Bunting <>
>>Subject: Re: [Fwd: FW: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop
>>Invitation -- Please Forward as Appropriate]
>>
>>
>>>I just realized, that Tuesday July 15 is the date for our WSRM
>>>conference call
>>>from 2:30 to 4:30 Pacific time.
>>>
>>>Tom Rutt
>>>\
>>>Doug Bunting wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Colleen,
>>>>
>>>>If specifications are separated appropriately, separate and independent
>>>>development should be straight-forward. Are you saying Microsoft has
>>>>done a poor job architecting GXA? Composability of the results and
>>>>broad involvement in specification development should not be
>>>>contradictory aims. Besides all that, one of the main enemies of
>>>>interoperability is competitive specifications.
>>>>
>>>>Sun strongly agrees with the points Magdolna and Alan have already
>>>>raised. If WS-ReliableMessaging, unlike at least BPEL4WS and
>>>>WS-Security, cannot be brought forward without the rest of the
>>>>architecture you are developing, fine. Please submit the whole ball of
>>>>wax to this or another standards venue. We believe specifications need
>>>>to be publicly and openly discussed and improved before they are
>>>>designated as standards.
>>>>
>>>>thanx,
>>>> doug
>>>>
>>>>On 07-Jul-03 07:22, Tom Rutt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I forward this from Colleen Evans, from Microsoft.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>Subject:
>>>>>FW: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- Please
>>>>>Forward as Appropriate
>>>>>From:
>>>>>"Colleen Evans" <>
>>>>>Date:
>>>>>Sun, 6 Jul 2003 21:18:30 -0700
>>>>>To:
>>>>>"Tom Rutt" <>, "Doug Bunting" <>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi Tom and Doug,
>>>>>
>>>>>I received a reject from the TC list (only contributing members may
>>>>>post). As I believe Magdolna and Alan are both out of the office,
>>>>>could one of you please forward this to the list?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>Colleen
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>*From:* Colleen Evans
>>>>>*Sent:* Sunday, July 06, 2003 10:08 PM
>>>>>*To:* 'Alan Weissberger';
>>>>>*Cc:* ; Felipe Cabrera
>>>>>*Subject:* RE: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop
>>>>>Invitation -- Please Forward as Appropriate
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Magdolna and Alan,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>We are soliciting technical input that relates to improving technical
>>>>>aspects such as the performance, simplicity, robustness and
>>>>>composability of the WS-ReliableMessaging specification.
>>>>>
>>>>>A core requirement that drives the WS-ReliableMessaging specification
>>>>>is maintaining architectural cohesion within the specification and in
>>>>>relation to other web services specifications (WS-Security, Policy,
>>>>>and so on) and composability with other specifications that describe
>>>>>assurances (e.g. WS-Transactions). It is therefore very hard to
>>>>>proceed on final design of any one particular specification without
>>>>>commensurate progress on the others. Separating this specification?s
>>>>>process from the other Web Services specifications it composes with
>>>>>would harm the goals of composability and architectural coherence. A
>>>>>litmus test for the web services architecture is /bone fide/
>>>>>interoperability and composability demonstrated between various
>>>>>implementations from several vendors.
>>>>>
>>>>>The authors have organized this workshop to solicit public input and
>>>>>discussion on these specifications while they are early in their
>>>>>development. We believe that specifications need to demonstrate their
>>>>>value before it is appropriate to consider designating them a
>>>>>standard. Successful workshops with community input facilitate
>>>>>reaching the interoperability and composability target needed to
>>>>>assure that these specifications meet their goals. As the
>>>>>specification matures and this extent of interoperability has been
>>>>>demonstrated, the authors will decide on the appropriate relation to
>>>>>standards organizations and/or any other specification efforts.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Colleen
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>*From:* Alan Weissberger [mailto:]
>>>>>*Sent:* Friday, July 04, 2003 9:27 AM
>>>>>*To:* ; Colleen Evans
>>>>>*Cc:* ; Felipe Cabrera
>>>>>*Subject:* Re: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop
>>>>>Invitation -- Please Forward as Appropriate
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Colleen
>>>>>
>>>>>What standards body are you planning to take your revised spec to?
>>>>>As far as I know, OASIS is the only appropriate standards body for
>>>>>this work.
>>>>>
>>>>>As I mentioned to you today, not only is the WS-RM TC open, but we ARE
>>>>>NOT about to rubber stamp the spec that was brought in to initiate the TC.
>>>>>The WS-RM TC members have spent all our time and efforts on
>>>>>establishing functional requirements. These will be incorporate into
>>>>>the spec (with additions and deletions), as agreed. For example, on
>>>>>last week's telecon we got rid of Message ID, as it was considered to
>>>>>be redundant with Group ID/Sequence number as a unique identifier.
>>>>>
>>>>>At GGF8 in Seattle, I talked to Felipe Cabrera of Microsoft about
>>>>>participating in the WS-RM TC. He was not very receptive and told me
>>>>>to read your spec, as it was clearly superior.
>>>>>
>>>>>My opinion is that competing specs are harmful to the industry. It
>>>>>would be great if the two WS RM'g specs could be consolidated/ merged
>>>>>to incorporate the best features of both. This could take place in
>>>>>the WS-RM TC if Microsoft and the other authors decided to participate.
>>>>>
>>>>>I will attend your workshop on July 15, but will not offer any
>>>>>opinions or suggestions on how Microsoft and other authors should
>>>>>progress the work on Reliable Messaging..
>>>>>
>>>>>Sincerely
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>alan
>>>>>
>>>>>Alan Weissberger
>>>>>
>>>>>Technical Consultant- NEC
>>>>>2013 Acacia Ct
>>>>>
>>>>>Santa Clara, CA 95050-3482
>>>>>
>>>>>1 408 863 6042 voice
>>>>>
>>>>>1 408 863 6099 fax
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>>From:
>>>>>Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:13:22 +0200
>>>>>To:
>>>>>Subject: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation --
>>>>>Please Forward as Appropriate
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi Colleen,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm a bit surprised. And have a question based on the quote from the
>>>>>document you sent:
>>>>>
>>>>>"
>>>>>
>>>>>The authors of the Specification intend to submit a revised version of
>>>>>the Specification to a standards body with a commitment to grant a
>>>>>royalty-free license to their necessary patents. We need assurance
>>>>>that your feedback and discussions are consistent with that goal.
>>>>>
>>>>>"
>>>>>
>>>>>Why don't they join to the OASIS WS-RM TC to work on ONE
>>>>>WS-Reliability standard instead of going to standardize another one ?
>>>>>The OASIS WS-RM TC is open.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>br,
>>>>>
>>>>>Magdolna
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>*From:* ext Colleen Evans [mailto:]
>>>>>*Sent:* July 03,2003 3:46
>>>>>*Subject:* WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- Please
>>>>>Forward as Appropriate
>>>>>
>>>>>The authors of the recently-published WS-ReliableMessaging
>>>>>specification are hosting a 1-day meeting on July 15, 2003, 9am to
>>>>>5pm, to discuss this specification. This meeting will be held in
>>>>>Building 21, Columbia conference room on the Microsoft campus in Redmond, WA.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>This is an ad-hoc, open forum for 1) *SPECIFICATION AUTHORS* to share
>>>>>background information on the design of the specifications and to
>>>>>receive feedback and 2) *SOFTWARE VENDORS* to discuss their ideas
>>>>>about the practicality of implementing these and related Web Services
>>>>>specifications.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>We'd like this to be an open meeting and collect a broad range of
>>>>>ideas. If you are interested in participating in the discussions,
>>>>>please reply to this mail by *EOD 11 July 2003*. Feel free to pass
>>>>>this invitation along to other potential participants, either in your
>>>>>company or elsewhere.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Note that in order to attend, the attached legal agreement MUST be
>>>>>signed by each attendee.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thank you and we look forward to seeing you soon.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Colleen Evans
>>>>>
>>>>>XML Web Services Standards
>>>>>Microsoft Corporation
>>>>>303 791-3090 or 425 703-9066
>>>>>Mobile: 720 480-3919
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting
>>>>>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting
>>>>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php
>>>>
>>>>
>>>-- ----------------------------------------------------
>>>Tom Rutt email: ;
>>>Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting
>>>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Alan Weissberger
>>2013 Acacia Ct
>>Santa Clara, CA 95050-3482
>>1 408 863 6042 voice
>>1 408 863 6099 fax
>>
>>
>>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting
>>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>----------------------------------------------------
>Tom Rutt email: ;
>Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
>
>
>
>
>
>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting
>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php
>
