[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: DSS - ebXML transport binding
Dear public, the following comment from the discussions of the TC shall be hereby made available to the public during puplic comment period. Following the initial Comment by Pim van der Eijk the following subsequent Comments and Discussion by Nick Pope and Andreas Kühne: """ Nick, >> How would you suggest we answer the specific point made about adding >> ebXML capabilities to the Core. >> >> I thought initially that maybe a ebXML specific profile would be >> more appropriate. >> Alternatively, is adding ebXML transport to the Core >> something >> that can be done with minimal disruption to the Core? Is it >> for something the next round? For several reasons I would prefer to go for a separate ebXML profile : - 1.0 is out for public review, it's too late to add significant functionality - Once there is a reference to ebXML is in the core, people may shy away from the whole spec : 'much too heavy-weighted !' Iirc we saw concern regarding SOAP, and ebXML is quite a different class. - If there is a ebXML profile ready next year, hopefully along with some other profiles, we keep some attention on our effort. - InterOp for ebXML is quite some effort. Especially starting with ebXML from scratch is a significant task. Can't see that we can handle this 'til end of the year ( or any other acceptable InterOp deadline ) Other opinions welcome ! [[Nick Pope agreed]] """ Initial Comment by Pim van der Eijk noted here for ease of reference: """ On behalf of an end-user community that is looking to implement DSS in an ebXML infrastructure, I would like to submit the following comment public comment to the DSS TC. The ability of the ebXML Messaging as a transport protocol to use standard facilities for asynchronous messaging, routing based on PartyId, and reliable messaging, and the bilateral service configuration capabilities of ebXML Collaboration Protocols and Agreements are a main benefit compared to Asynchronous Processing Abstract Profile for the OASIS Digital Signature Services (which uses a protocol similar to XKMS). Core features of an ebMS binding, for consideration: - Fixed value for the ebXML "eb:Service" header element: "urn:oasis:names:tc:dss:1.0:ebxml-msg" - Fixed values for the ebXML "eb:Action" header element, one of: "SignRequest" "SignResponse" "VerifyRequest" "VerifyResponse" Payload/header/message correlation: An ebXML message with a value "eb:Action" set to "SignResponse" (respectively, "VerifyResponse") sent from MSH A to MSH B should contain an "eb:RefToMessageId" header element. The value of this element must match the value of the eb:MessageId header element in an earlier ebXML message sent from MSH B to MSH A with a value "eb:Action" set to "SignRequest" (respectively, "VerifyRequest"). The "eb:Service" would be "urn:oasis:names:tc:dss:1.0:ebxml-msg". If the DSS XML document included in that earlier request message contains a DSS "RequestId", the response message should include a DSS "RequestId" with the same value. Request and response messages have the same values for eb:ConversationId and eb:CPAId/eb:AgreementRef. The SSL/TLS transport level security settings for the ebXML message exchange would adhere to the DSS transport security settings. The above is only a binding and would work with DSS XML request and response documents as used in the HTTP and SOAP 1.2 bindings. To take advantage of the ebXML message structure, it might make sense to allow the dss:Document to reference documents stored in subsequent MIME attachments in the SOAP-with-attachments message structure (via a reference attribute using an RFC 2392 "cid" URI). When using a registry to store partner profiles or agreement templates (or negotiation description documents), the fixed values of the eb:Service and eb:Action would allow partners to find a suitable digital signature service provider in a particular community using the query functionality of the registry. This profile works equally with ebXML Messaging version 2 (ISO 15000) and the upcoming version 3 ebXML specification. Would the TC consider adding an ebXML Messaging transport profile along these lines to section 6 of the DSS 1.0 core specification? Pim van der Eijk """ Regards, Stefan Drees, Editor DSS Core Draft. OASIS::TC_DSS.ActionRef("06-10-30-04") OASIS::TC_DSS.ActionRef("06-10-30-05")
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]