[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Preliminary Minutes of 1/11 WSRM TC meeting
The prelim minutes are attached. Please post corrections before the end of this week. Tom Rutt Chair WSRM TC -- ---------------------------------------------------- Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; [email protected] Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133Title: Draft Agenda to WSRM TC Conference Call � May 06, 2003
|
Full Agenda of WSRM TC Conference Call � The meeting of the WSRM� TC took place by teleconference 1
Draft
Agenda:
��� 1 Draft Agenda to WSRM TC Conference Call ��� 2 Roll Call ��� 3 Minutes Discussion ��� 3.1 Appointment of Minute Taker ��� 3.2 Approval of previous meeting minutes � �� �4 Action Item Status Review ��� 5 Status of WS-Reliability Specification ��� 6 Status of Interop SC activities ��� 7 Next Step Documentation ��� 7.1 Editorial Clarifications and Errata ��� 7.2 Implementation Guidelines ��� 7.2 Future Enhancement Requests ��� 7.3 Composability with other WS-Specs ��� 8 Discussion of Future Meetings 2
Roll
Call
Attendance:
Meeting is quorate. 3
Minutes
Discussion
3.1 Appointment of Minute TakerTom Rutt will take minutes. Minutes will serve to record issue resolutions. 3.2 Approval of previous meeting minutesThe minutes of the 12/14� meeting are posted at: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/10919/MinutesWSRMTC121404.htm�� Agreed to wait for the next meeting to approve 12/14 minutes. 4 Status of Action Items4.1 Action 090704-1 (Tom) PendingAction: Tom will try to find, from previous minutes, a list of features we have put off for future versions and will post it to the list for discussion. 4.2 Action 113004-2 (Bob F and Interop SC) PendingAction: Bob will work with the Interop SC to have them recast a next version of their feedback document using the following three categories (and taking into account the discussion at the F2F). 4.3 Action 121404-2 (Jeff M and Interop SC) PendingAction: Jeff M will provide examples of soap header dumps with both ws-reliability and ws-addressing eaders in use, as in the interop demo. 5 Status of WS-Reliability SpecificationTom updated the public and member web site pages for the TC to refer by URL to spec and� schema at the proper location on the OASIS web site. http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrm/2004/06/WS-Reliability-CD1.086.pdf http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrm/2004/06/fnp-1.1.xsd http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrm/2004/06/reference-1.1.xsd http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrm/2004/06/ws-reliability-1.1.xsd http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrm/2004/06/wsrmfp-1.1.xsd The spec itself still shows status a CD. 6 Status of Interop SC activitiesQuestions have been asked about public sites for testing spec. 7 Next Step Documentation7.1 Editorial Clarifications and Errata�Clarifications , editorial nits, interpretations of the actual specification, which should be posted for others to see 7.2 Implementation Guidelines / Application NotesThings to help implementers, which, would typically be specific to application environments. 7.3 Future Enhancement RequestsProposed changes for future versions which would ease implementation or enhance protocol capabilities. 8 Composability with other WS-SpecsJacques posted a contribution for discussion at: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/10281/WS-R_Composability_status.txt Jacques will act as editor, but will await input from others. Solicit comments on the original paper for discussion at next meeting Jan 11. Alan W posted the translation of a Japanese document regarding composition of WS-reliability with WS-Security at: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/10926/WS-R%20WS-Security-20050107.doc Alan explained that this is the document he referred to at the face to face meeting.� The Japanese companies finalized this contribution just last week. This makes the reliable message secure and tamper proof.� It does not address making security headers reliably delivered. Alan explained that Jacques and Alan will both be editors for the document as it progresses in the TC. Jacques: This document focuses on only one method for composability.� There are other ways to compose ws security and ws reliability.� We would like to see more of this in the document. The initial document I send out in November was about multiple aspects of composability with ws-reliability.� We still need to have a ws composability document to explain how the model of ws-reliability handles composition aspects. Another aspect of composability is with supporting specifications.� Its not just soap header composition.� Some extensibility points exist for addressing in the callback response.�� Also how to use supporting specs for presenting rm agreements. This document from Tom: there is an open action item on this. Joe C: Do we anticipate this could be a joint technical note with ws-security TC? Jacques: perhaps.� We could go with a single document with general study of composability.� Or we could go with a family of documents. Alan: I prefer the modularity of a family of documents. Joe: does ws security need to have reliability for ws security headers? Alan: We do need a joint meeting with them on this. Alan: I feel that the ws security group should review this document.� Our intent for TC review is to get this approved as a technical note for oasis. Joe: wsrp and ebxml registry did a joint technical note. Jeff: Do you really want the WSS TC to approve? Alan: Informal review and comments would suffice. Jeff : I suggest we review it once ourselves first.. Jacques:� we would like a review before submitting it outside. Tom: Will the editors take care of the grammatical edits. Jacques: Alan and I will be working on this soon. Alan: we are interested first in higher level comments, on this approach. Jacques: first the composition itself between reliability and security.� We need more review on this from more people. Then the architectural aspects of this composition need to be reviewed by the implementers of this spec.�� We need to ensure the architecture is modular in the soap processing sense. Tom: when could a next document be ready? Alan: that depends on the comments we get.� The current spec does not deal with encryption of headers, it only deals with encryption of payload, to allow the headers to be processed by intermediaries. Anish: signing of headers is not a problem for intermediaries.� Encryption of headers could be done if the intermediary is trusted. Tom: We need to get members to look at this document and focus on what additional usage scenarios we need to develop for this document. . Tom: perhaps the Oracle action item on their use of security in the demo will suggest an additional usage scenario to add. Jeff: before we start sending stuff to wss tc, we need to determine if it is what we agree with. Tom: we should look at both of these documents for comments before the next meeting Action: tom will send an email soliciting comments to the group. Doug: the document is fairly unreadable in open office, and looks long and dense.�� Can it be simplified.. Jacques: we could have a simplified document as a second version Doug: it needs a pdf version, the document does not look good in open office. �action: Tom will post a pdf version of the document after the meeting. 1 Discussion of Future MeetingsPotentially, what is the next Face to face. Third or fourth weeks March are both candidates.�� Get a better idea at the next meeting. Agreed to continue schedule of 90 minute teleconferences every two weeks, from Jan 11. Jan 11, Jan 25, Feb 8, Feb 22 Jeff Moved , Joe C seconded to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 6:20 PM. |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]