[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Proposed list of issues for discussion on 10/13 conf-call
Christopher B Ferris wrote: > > Sanjay, > > I can appreciate that POV, but frankly, I think that the protocol spec > is far more important. > There aren't many outstanding issues and it would be great if we could > close on the issues > we have and nail down the protocol spec sooner rather than later. > Issue 006 could have impact on the protocol spec, and it depends on issues 008 and 021. However, I agree that the email around these proposed solutions has not yet reached concensus. Thus I do not mind postponing resolution of 6, 8, and 21 until further discussion occurs on the list. Tom Rutt > Cheers, > > Christopher Ferris > STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture > email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com > blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html > phone: +1 508 377 9295 > > "Patil, Sanjay" <sanjay.patil@sap.com> wrote on 10/12/2005 12:28:03 PM: > > > > > Hi Chris, > > > > I wanted to give a good try to the policy related issues on this > > week's call and that is why the other issues in my proposed list > > are purely editorial. > > > > I had privately requested the owners of the policy related issues to > > submit proposals before this week's conf-call and thankfully they > > have responded with some proposals (may not be entirely formal) and > > there seems to be some discussion on the list. As we all know, the > > policy relaed issues are not very straightforward and personally I > > can understand the issue owner's sentiment and willingness to take > > some advice on resolution from the TC as opposed to bringing in a > > fully baked formal proposal for vote. > > > > Let us give these issues a good try tomorrow and if there is still > > no significant outcome we may have to postopone these isssues for > > the next F2F, etc. > > > > Having said that, if the TC at large (including the owners of the > > policy issues) finds it prudent to postpone the policy related > > issues, we could certainly decide to do so on the call tomorrow as > > the first order of business (agenda approval). Meanwhile it will be > > great to see concrete proposals for other open issues and be > > prepared with some good subsitutes for the policy related issues. > > > > Thanks, > > Sanjay > > > > From: Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, Oct 12, 2005 8:44 AM > > To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org > > Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Proposed list of issues for discussion on > 10/13conf-call > > > > > Sanjay/Paul, > > > > I'm a little concerned that some of the policy-related issues on the > > plate this week will result in > > much lively discussion, but relatively little in the way of > > consensus and resolution. > > > > I would propose that we add some of the RM-spec related issues for > > which there are > > concrete proposals, and which IMO could be easily and quickly > > resolved on the call. I would > > prefer that we focus on issues that we can resolve rather than spend > > time on the call > > to hash over issues that are clearly not yet approaching consensus > > on the email list. > > > > i038 [1] looks like it could be easily resolved. I could go either > > way to be honest (reference > > RFC3986 or RFC3987 (IRI)). Since WS-Addressing has referenced > > RFC3987 and RM leverages > > the EPR for AcksTo, that we go with the reference to RFC3987 and be > > done with it. > > > > i042 [2] is another that we should be able to close on quickly. I > > will send a separate proposal > > to the list. > > > > i023 [3] is an issue that IMO is out of scope for the TC. I will > > send a separate proposal to the list > > > > Finally, I would like to make a request of the issues list editor. > > It would REALLY help if the issues > > list could be updated to reflect the issues resolved as soon as > > possible after they are resolved. > > It has been over 2 weeks since the issues list was last updated. > > Thus, two weeks of issues > > resolutions are not reflected in the list. > > > > I know what is involved in maintaining the list and that the editors > > are busy with other responsibilities > > (aren't we all!), but possibly the addition of an intermediate > > status that removes an issue from "open" > > to a status that means that it has been resolved but the specifics > > have not been documented in the issues > > list would be in order for times like these when there isn't enough > > time to devote to making a full pass > > at updating issues with the details of their resolutions, etc. It is > > quite difficult to have to compare the > > issues list with the minutes from the past meetings to determine > > which issues are really open and > > which have simply not been updated to reflect the decisions of the TC. > > > > [1] http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download. > > php/14682/Re#i038 > > [2] http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download. > > php/14682/Re#i042 > > [3] http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download. > > php/14682/Re#i023 > > > > Cheers, > > > > Christopher Ferris > > STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture > > email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com > > blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html > > phone: +1 508 377 9295 > > > > "Patil, Sanjay" <sanjay.patil@sap.com> wrote on 10/10/2005 05:46:24 PM: > > > > > > > > Issue 37: WS-Addressing Endpoint redefined in WSRM > > > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/14682/Re > > > liableMessagingIssues.xml#i037 > > > > > > Issue 41: Presence of NACK and ACK range in the same message > > > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/14682/Re > > > liableMessagingIssues.xml#i041 > > > > > > Isssue 43: Why is wsa imported in the WSDL? > > > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/14682/Re > > > liableMessagingIssues.xml#i043 > > > > > > Issue 21: An RM Policy applies two-way > > > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/14682/Re > > > liableMessagingIssues.xml#i021 > > > > > > Issue 8: Policy assertions granularity > > > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/14682/Re > > > liableMessagingIssues.xml#i008 > > > > > > Issue 6: Source based delivery QoS policy assertion > > > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/14682/Re > > > liableMessagingIssues.xml#i006 > > > > > > -- ---------------------------------------------------- Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]