[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wss] SwA Profile change
Chris and everyone The current draft of the SwA profile, draft 14, requires that all WS-Security references to SwA attachments be CID scheme only. At this week's WSS committee meeting (Tuesday 16 Nov) the TC agreed that this will be decided at the next WSS meeting, on 30 November. There was no objection at the meeting for requiring CID scheme references. As far as I know, Chris has been the only one to respond [1] to my email raising this issue, sent 10 Nov [2] and clearly repeated 12 Nov [3]. Thus unless a strong objection is raised to the list I expect the SwA profile to require CID scheme references for attachments. The argument for supporting Content-Location is that both SwA and BP1.0 allow it. The argument against is that only supporting CID scheme is simpler, and that we've only interop'd that. If you are a proponent of SwA please respond to the WSS list with your recommendation this week if possible. We need to resolve this at the next WSS meeting. I will plan on editing the document accordingly, after the TC decision at the next WSS meeting. Thanks regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia [1] http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wss/200411/msg00041.html [2] http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wss/200411/msg00015.html [3] http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wss/200411/msg00026.html -----Original Message----- From: ext Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 11:04 AM To: Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-TP/Boston) Cc: wss@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [wss] SwA Profile change Frederick, regardless of practice, there is no practical difference between resolution of different schemes, or for relative URIs both of which are permitted. This constraint is purely arbitrary. I don't have time to explain this now but I think if you read RFC2557 and SwA there is an explanatoion. 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 <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com> 11/16/2004 09:47 AM To Christopher B Ferris/Waltham/IBM@IBMUS cc <wss@lists.oasis-open.org> Subject RE: [wss] SwA Profile change Chris The primary reason is that URL resolution for attachments referenced by Content-Location could lead to interop issues, and issues related to possible URL redirection. The second reason is that WSS has only interop'd CIDs and it seems to be what people are using in practice - so it seems appropriate to go with the most simplicity possible. Do you see an issue with constraining the WS-Security references to CIDs? I would like to see the TC resolve this issue at today's WSS meeting. regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia -----Original Message----- From: ext Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 9:06 AM To: Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-TP/Boston) Cc: wss@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [wss] SwA Profile change Frederick, What reason is there to constrain the URI scheme for referencing attachments when neither SwA nor the AP1.0 place any such constraints? 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 <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com> 11/12/2004 01:52 PM To <wss@lists.oasis-open.org> cc Subject [wss] SwA Profile change Unless I hear an objection, the next draft of WSS SwA profile will limit attachment references to CID scheme URLs. regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wss/members/leave_workgroup .php.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]