[FWD: [ebxml-dev] Proposal to Profile ebMS v3 announced]

["David RR Webber \(XML\)" <david@drrw.info>]

Pim,

I could not see the original post to ebxml-msg so I'm forwarding here as I assume that was your intent as well.

Maybe Outlook "auto complete" snagged the dev list first?!?

Anyway - no worries - I think it excellent the community be aware of this work - and I wholeheartedly support what is being proposed and would suggest we expedite setting this up and commencing the formal work on this within the TC.

Do we need a sub-committee do you think - or is it easier and quicker to just take on this ourselves here?  (My sense is "yes").

Thanks, DW

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [ebxml-dev] Proposal to Profile ebMS v3  announced
> From: "Pim van der Eijk" <lists@sonnenglanz.net>
> Date: Sat, March 01, 2008 10:51 am
> To: <ebxml-dev@lists.ebxml.org>
> 
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-msg/200802/msg00030.html
> http://ebxml.xml.org/news/proposal-to-profile-ebms-v3-on-behalf-of-timothy-b
> ennett-drummond-group
> 
> A group of B2B industry leaders representing Cisco Systems, the Drummond
> Group, Extol International, and Sterling Commerce would like to propose the
> formation of a subproject within the ebXML Messaging Services TC with the
> intention of developing and publishing a profile of the ebMS v3.0
> specification.
> 
> This profile will leverage the existing work done by the ebXML MS TC to
> provide guidance for a standardized methodology for the secure and
> document-agnostic exchange of B2B payloads using a Web services platform. By
> constraining the ebMS v3.0 specification and the underlying WS-I profiles
> for messaging packaging, transport, security, and non-repudiation, the
> proposed profile will focus on providing an entry-level on-ramp for Web
> services B2B messaging. The end goal of this profile development is to
> replicate and strategically extend the existing functional requirements
> currently satisfied by RFC4130 (AS2) by mapping those requirements onto the
> Web services platform. We believe that the ebMS v3.0 provides a robust
> specification and a respected standards body, and much of the work done by
> this TC can be leveraged for this business need.
> 
> The group proposing this profile see the business value of such a profile
> and are committed to authoring the profile under the guidance and support of
> the TC. The companies represented above have committed to development of the
> profile, implementing the profile in product-with-version, and participation
> in a full matrix interoperability test.
> 
> Last year, a group of B2B software vendors had a series of technical
> discussions to formulate an initial set of functional requirements that
> would comprise a secure, document-agnostic Web services B2B messaging
> standard. The following is a summary of those requirements that had general
> consensus among the participants:
> 
> + All messages must use SOAP 1.1 enveloping structure SOAP 1.1, 
> + WS-Security, SOAP w/Attachments, and WS-Addressing were
> identified as the fundamental underlying WS-* specifications.
> + WS-I Basic Profile, WS-I Basic Security Profile, and WS-I
> Attachments Profile were identified as relevant WS-* profiles to leverage.
> + All business document payloads must be transmitted in the message as
> SOAP Attachments and are to be agnostic with respect to any SOAP operations
> or WSDL definitions.
> + No payloads will be included in the SOAP body element Multiple 
> + document payloads may be supported Application of payload compression 
> + may be supported, and if so must
> occur prior to attaching the document and prior to the application to any
> message-level security
> + The use of WS-Addressing header constructs in order to facilitate
> route and endpoint identification of exchange messages, and to relate
> request-reply message exchange patterns.
> + Support for message-level security including various combinations of
> XML Dsig and/or XML Encryption as governed by WS-Security, constrained to
> use only X.509 security tokens and detached signatures only.
> + Support for business non-repudiation acknowledgements similar to
> RFC3798 (MDN)
> + Support for only the One-Way/Push (synchronous and asynchronous) and
> the Two-Way/Push-and-Push (asynchronous only) MEPs.
> 
> After reviewing these initial functional requirements, it was readily
> apparent that these requirements overlapped with the existing protocol
> specified by RFC4130 (AS2). With the recent publication of the ebMS v3
> specification, it was also clear that ebMS v3 shared some common ground with
> these requirements as well. As such we believe a profile that maps these
> requirements onto the ebMS v3 specification will not only provide businesses
> with a simplified on-ramp to Web services B2B messaging (including verticals
> that might wish to migrate from AS2 to Web services), but could serve as a
> pre-cursor to a full implementation of the ebMS v3 specification.
> 
> The technical discussions further produced an initial generalized roadmap of
> the evolution of the profile development in different
> phases:
> 
> Phase I: Basic Web services Transport and Security =E2=80=93 WS-I, SOAP 1=
> .1, SwA, WS-Security, and WS-Addressing are focal points, with simple
> document-agnostic message exchange choreograhies with and without business
> non-repudiation.
> 
> Phase II: Advanced Web services B2B Topics =E2=80=93 Quality of Service
> concerns (Reliable Messaging), Very Large Message exchange, and perhaps more
> complex message exchange choreographies.
> 
> Phase III: Niche Functionality =E2=80=93 SOAP 1.2, Secure Conversations, =
> and other WS-* specs such as Trust, Identity, Policy, etc.
> 
> If these requirements are actualized by our proposed ebMS v3 profile, the
> phased evolution of this extended functionality could be realized in either
> a full implementation of the ebMS v3 specification or by extending the
> initial profile.
> 
> We thank this TC ahead of time for considering this proposal and we welcome
> any comments or feedback.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Timothy Bennett, Drummond Group
> John Voss, Cisco Systems
> Mark Denchy, Extol International
> Mike Maxwell, Sterling Commerce