Public Comment

[comment-form@oasis-open.org]

Comment from: vannhu2000@yahoo.com

Name: Van Nhu
Title: Mr
Organization: RMIT
Regarding Specification: SPML V2

Hello to the list.

I have some questions from my earlier days working on a SPML V2 implementation that I would really appreciate you answering.

1. Should we default these flags: CapabilityDataType.mustUnderstand, BulkDeleteRequestType.recursive, and SchemaEntityRefType.isContainer to “false”?

2. Should we make the attributes: ValidatePasswordResponseType.valid and ActiveResponseType.active both mandatory to avoid unnecessary ambiguities?

3. A single Add Request may result in multiple objects being created. For example, based on some provisioning roles/policies, certain end point accounts might get created for each new employee; or a PST might create missing container entries as needed when processing an Add Request. So, should we make the Add Response to return a list of PSOType objects so that auxiliary objects can be included in the response?

4. The spec says that the cancel request is for stopping the execution of an asynchronous operation, but I think it would be a good idea to also allow cancelling long running synchronous operations, as long as the RA supplies a request id in the initial synchronous request.

5. For better performance, it would be good if there is a standard way to retrieve only certain portions of the matching objects in the Search and Lookup requests.

6. It would be good if batch/bulk requests can be treated as atomic operations where the RA can specify that partial results must be rolled back for a failed transaction?

7. Do you think that it would be useful to include in the spec a standard capability for renaming and moving a PSO to a different container in a hierarchical target?

Thanks for your help.
Van