RE: [soa-rm-ra] agenda this week [was: [soa-rm-ra] Latest (Last?) draft

Per the action to all from the last RAF call, I reviewed the RM-ODP appendix and section 5.2.

I agree with Michael that the entire text except for the last paragraph is a detailed summary of RM-ODP. This is more than is needed to relate RM-ODP to the SOA-RAF. Then the last paragraph doesn’t adequately cover why SOA-RAF work is interested in the RM-ODP and what similarities or differences are important to highlight. I think we want to note that we have coordinated with the HL7 SAIF CD (as noted in appendix D.2) and we found that the synergy between SAIF CD and SOA-RAF is in part due to the corresponding synergy with the underlying RM-ODP. Again, we can note where there may be differences in terminology but basic consistency of ideas.

With respect to 5.2 Security, I think the section holds together nicely. It introduces security concepts that are relevant to SOA and then goes into the threats and responses. The discussion of access control is particularly relevant for service composition and dealing with security along a service chain. What it does not explicitly do is say this is SOA important, in particular because ... . Michael has the background in discussing things in terms of the SOA ecosystem, and I hope his comments will make that connection.

Other opinions?

Ken

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Kenneth Laskey

MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934

7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379

McLean VA 22102-7508

From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 7:50 AM
To: Ken Laskey; Peter F Brown; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] agenda this week [was: [soa-rm-ra] Latest (Last?) draft of the RAF]

Hi All,
I have technical problems today with both telephone and computer. I have prepares relatively detailed comment for today agenda but have to send a short version for now.

I agree with the text that Peter distributed the last time except 3 points:

1) I do not represent Fidelity any more (in Pareticipants list) but I am an Independent Member :-)

2) Regarding RM - ODP: text about them is too detailed and leaves an impression that we just repeated their work. I propose to suppress this text and add our major differences: SO Ecosystem that lasts far beyond enterprise boundaries (while RM-ODP does not go across them, and the definition and declaration the SO Ecosystem is in Business as well as in Technology (even Business Services in RM-ODP do not clearly indicate that they consider SOA in Business, for business teams)

3) I believe that section 5.2 Security Model has to be re-worked. Currently, it is written in the style ike 'here is security and, BTW, it also applicable to SOA'. I propose to change the approach in a way: 'here are specifics of security in SOA and here is how we recommend to address them'. The rest of security stuff is known and may be simply referred to appropriate standards.

I acn help Kevin to identify SOA specifics in security if he wants.

Regards,
- Michael

----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Laskey
Sent: 07/09/12 03:49 AM
To: 'Peter F Brown', soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [soa-rm-ra] agenda this week [was: [soa-rm-ra] Latest (Last?) draft of the RAF]

I had an Outlook crash, so I’m sending again with a revised subject.

Ken

From: Ken Laskey [mailto:klaskey@mitre.org]
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2012 10:47 PM
To: 'Peter F Brown'; 'soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] Latest (Last?) draft of the RAF

All,

Please look over the material uploaded by Peter. On Wednesday, I’d like to vote on accepting the responses to the outstanding issues and to declare that we have addressed all comments submitted against the last public review. I would then like to set a schedule for

1.       subcommittee review so we can submit to the full TC

2.       notice to the full TC for a meeting to approve a new Committee Specification and a new public review

3.       new public review and, in particular, how long of a review.

The Public Review length should take into account people being away for summer.

Chet and Jamie – if you are lurking, how long is it now taking from request for a public review to the documents being ready to go out?

I am assuming the meeting this Wednesday (July 11) will begin at noon ET so I can cover the IEEE call.

Happy reading.

Ken

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Kenneth Laskey

MITRE Corporation, M/S H305              phone: 703-983-7934

7515 Colshire Drive                                    fax:        703-983-1379

McLean VA 22102-7508

From: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Peter F Brown
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2012 4:05 PM
To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [soa-rm-ra] Latest (Last?) draft of the RAF

Hi guys,

Attached is a doc and pdf copy of the latest draft , WD08. This contains:

-          All the figure updates;

-          All the Architectural Implications sections updates;

-          The agreed, revised section on Composition, business processes and collaboration;

-          The new section on Identity and Access Control, from Kevin Smith, as discussed at the last two meetings;

-          Updated appendix D;

-          Updates to ToC, list of figures and Index

In addition, is a snapshot of the Issues List, with all remaining open and ongoing work issues now resolved. These are all included now in the first sheet under “Recommend to Close” (20 Issues).

If we close those issues and agree the text, I think we are done.

I would certainly support a motion to confirm that at this coming Wednesday’s meeting.

I have loaded all the documents together on Kavi as a .zip file: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/soa-rm-ra/download.php/46435/SOA-RAF-v0.8.zip

and it is this file that we should reference in any decision and recommendation to the full RM for approval.

The next steps would be:

-          Getting full RM TC to adopt the text as new draft; to agree to publish this as a new Public Review (realistically, we should go for 30 days, given the extent of the changes);

-          If there are nothing but minor changes requested in the review period (and we take those on board), the RM TC could proceed to a vote to adopt the text as a Committee Specification;

-          Once that has been done, we would need to look for three examples of use of the RAF out in the wild among OASIS members or beyond, and if we collect three statements of use, we can ask for an OASIS-wide membership ballot to approve the specification as an OASIS Standard.

Peter F Brown

Independent Consultant

web: www.peterfbrown.com

twitter: @pensivepeter

P.O. Box 49719, Los Angeles, CA 90049, USA

Phone : (310) 694-2278

soa-rm-ra message