RE: [provision] Discussion and analysis of SPML 2.0 submission from IBM

["Jeff Bohren" <jbohren@opennetwork.com>]

Gerry,
 
It would be helpful to make a proposal of what parts of the current SPML 1.0 specification should be kept as is and what should be replaced or modified. That way we can have a useful discussion on the mail list leading up to the next face to face.
 
For instance you originally insisted that the only acceptable way to represent the meta-data of the provisioning target (i.e. the provisioning schema) was to represent it in XML Schema in WSDL so that client could be auto-generated. Now in your WS-Provisioning submission that approach is not taken. Instead the client gets the schema using a "FetchTargetRequest", and processes the "FetchTargetResponse" in order to read the schema. Since you have already abandoned a pure WSDL approach for representing schema, why could that not be merged into the current SPML schema mechanism?
 
Jeff Bohren
OpenNetwork Technologies
 
 

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Gearard Woods [mailto:gewoods@us.ibm.com] 
	Sent: Mon 12/1/2003 4:42 PM 
	To: Jeff Bohren 
	Cc: provision@lists.oasis-open.org 
	Subject: RE: [provision] Discussion and analysis of SPML 2.0 submission from IBM
	
	





	I think it's fair to say that the submission is intended to act as a
	statement of direction, indicating the form that we would like to see the
	SPML take.  We've been quite clear about the fundamental problems that we
	have with the current approach and on many occasions have pointed out that
	these issues need to be addressed at the foundations of the SPML.
	Reconciling the SPML1.0's schema and data models with the direction
	detailed in our submission is not trivial.  It is certainly not a
	cut-and-paste exercise.  The question to me is what portions of the SPML
	can be retained to meet our needs.  At present those are few.
	
	
	
	|---------+---------------------------->
	|         |           "Jeff Bohren"    |
	|         |           <jbohren@opennetw|
	|         |           ork.com>         |
	|         |                            |
	|         |           11/25/2003 06:56 |
	|         |           AM               |
	|---------+---------------------------->
	  >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
	  |                                                                                                                              |
	  |       To:       <provision@lists.oasis-open.org>                                                                             |
	  |       cc:                                                                                                                    |
	  |       Subject:  RE: [provision] Discussion and analysis of SPML 2.0 submission from IBM                                      |
	  >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
	
	
	
	
	The IBM Proposal looks to be a very good specification on it's own merits,
	but has no compatiblity with the current SPML 1.0 specification. What
	exactly is IBM proposing? Is IBM proposing the the current SPML
	specification be wholesale replaced with the IBM proposed specification? Or
	is IBM proposing this as input into the SPML 2.0 specification?
	
	If IBM is proposing this as input rather than a wholesale replacement, what
	parts does IBM feel are appropriate to incorporate into the SPML 2.0?
	
	
	Jeff Bohren
	Product Architect
	OpenNetwork Technologies, Inc
	
	Try the industry's only 100% .NET-enabled identity management software.
	Download your free copy of Universal IdP Standard Edition today. Go to
	www.opennetwork.com/eval.
	
	      -----Original Message-----
	      From: Darran Rolls [mailto:Darran.Rolls@waveset.com]
	      Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 9:46 AM
	      To: provision@lists.oasis-open.org
	      Subject: [provision] Discussion and analysis of SPML 2.0 submission
	      from IBM
	
	      As you are no doubt aware, IBM has submitted a specification document
	      to the PSTC for consideration as content and requirements for SPML
	      Version 2.0.  This submission can be found at [1].  Do you have
	      questions regarding the intent, status or content of this submission?
	
	      [1] http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/provision/200310/msg00001.html