[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [security-services] FW: SOAP Confidentiality and Integrity: N extStep?
No, I don't think we can say that. However the chances of the W3C membership approving a direct competitor to WS-Security are negligible. Phill > -----Original Message----- > From: RL 'Bob' Morgan [mailto:rlmorgan@washington.edu] > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 12:41 PM > To: OASIS Security Services TC > Subject: Re: [security-services] FW: SOAP Confidentiality and > Integrity: > Next Step? > > > > Does the submission of the WS-Security specs to OASIS (and the meeting > announced by Phill) mean that there will *not* be a "web services > security" activity chartered within the W3C? > > - RL "Bob" > > --- > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Joseph Reagle [mailto:reagle@w3.org] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 1:24 PM > > To: www-ws-arch@w3.org > > Cc: xml-encryption@w3.org; 3.org@w3.org; www-xkms@w3.org > > Subject: SOAP Confidentiality and Integrity: Next Step? > > > > > > > > > > This email is a final step in a thread in how to start work > on providing > > confidentiality and integrity for SOAP messages. I've > discused a range of > > security issues [1] with a conclusion that this topic > (soap+xmldsig+xenc) > > is most pressing; however, I was not able to find agreement > that this issue > > should be shoe-horned into an existing WG, instead it > should be part of the > > Web Services security. [2] > > > > Though I'm relatively ignorant of the ws-arch discussions, > I've heard the > > ws-arch WG is considering this issue and will try to have charters > > available for work in July [3], but that the immediate > issue might also be > > delayed be consideration of the bigger issues. > Consequently, I'd recommend > > that a charter for work in the WS Activity be specified > with a scope no > > larger than [4] -- and potentially more narrow (e.g., > without tokens). A > > "web services security" community does not yet exist (or it > does, but it's > > fragmented) and starting work on this immediately not only > commences with > > the work, but helps build a community which then can > contribute to the > > larger discussion. For instance, because standardized > security components > > do not yet exist, specifications such as XKMS [5] may end > up specifying > > "one-off" versions in the short term. However, these could > be contributed > > to the WS work. We all know somebody who knows somebody who > is in the other > > WG, but sometimes that isn't quite enough. <smile/> > > > > In conclusion, I advocate a charter with specific and > immediate terms, and > > an active recruitment of participants. Please let me know > if and how events > > are likely to be otherwise. Thanks! > > > > > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-forum/2002AprJun/0022.html > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xenc-xmlp-tf/2002Jun/0002.html > [3] http://www.w3.org/2002/05/28-ws-cg-irc.txt > [4] > http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/security/library/ws-secure/?dwzone=sec > urity > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnglobspec/ > html/ws-security.asp > [5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xkms/2002Jun/0016.html > > > -- > Joseph Reagle Jr. http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/ > W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org > IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/Signature/ > W3C XML Encryption Chair http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC