Re: [ebxml-bp] Groups - New Action Item #0007 Provide IV&I and STARUse Cases

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

>Kulvantunyou: I am forwarding a whitepaper and a slide which discuss about the
>requirements in IV&I project. One issue that the project tries to resolve is
>whether to adopt a Push, a Pull, or both model to sync data b/w IV tools. I
>believe that from the BPSS perspective it can support either one.
>
>One functionality that I see not existing in the current BPSS spec is to be
>able to specify relationship b/w BPSS executions. As described in the paper
>that each IV shouldn't push or pull too often. Although, I am not sure if we
>would consider this in the scope of the BPSS.
>
mm1: We can add this as a potential Work Item.

>Another interesting case is to connect 2 IV tools, tool A has to register
>with tool B first by authentication using user identity in tool B. After the
>registration then tool A uses user identity in tool A to obtain
>authentication and authorizion with tool B before retriving data. Does BPSS
>need and can express this?
>  
>
mm1:  BPSS does provide the capability to specify criteria associated 
with an interaction such as isConfidential, isTamperDetectable, 
isAuthenticated for the Document Envelop that applies to the logical 
Business Document.  This can also apply to attachments. See Document 
Security section of current v1.1 specification.

In looking at these few specific IV&I scenarios Serm, I do see some 
potential use cases for ebBP:

    * Hub and spoke model (Big company and many SME; large broker with
      many clients, etc).
    * Central management point (Security managed local to the hub).
    * Make interchanges accessible to participants.
    * Provide capability to allow timing of the activities based on
      batch or at the time of receipt. This could affect timeToPerform
      and timing associated with any signals issued.  Determine if there
      are finite timing parameters for the clients to retrieve the data
      for overall business agreement (such as the data must be retrieved
      in 3 hours in order for order response within 4 hours, for example).

This may also rise the opportunity to understand one of our other 
proposed work items surrounding the capability to support generation of 
the lower level execution.
To address this opportunity as well as Dave Webber's comments, I would 
suggest you provide the higher level process flow or view of IV&I which 
I know exists.  I have the higher level view from OAG meetings but would 
request you advise what is freely distributable.  Dave, to your point, 
the high level views exist but the cases Serm provided detail some 
specific technical questions being resolved by the IV&I team (i.e. they 
do see the forest and the trees).

Serm, I encourage you and the IV&I team to bring back the higher level 
view and we can review as well as consider these other potential views 
that may affect/relate to BPSS. Thanks.

>ps. I think I didn't say that I will do the STAR use case. :(
>
mm1: We will leave this to another action (between inquiry with Dave 
Webber to OAG and myself). Thanks.