RE: avoiding conflicting vendor extensions

["Griffin, Robert" <robert.griffin@rsa.com>]

Hi –

 

Since it looks to me that there isn’t a good mechanism for including non-TC members in a process for registering extensions, I’d like to withdraw my idea.

 

Of course, if any TC member would like to publish their extensions to the TC, they are certainly free to do so! I suggest we leave the handling of extensions to this informal process.

 

Regards,

Bob

 

 

 

From: Griffin, Robert
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 11:22 AM
To: kmip@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: avoiding conflicting vendor extensions

 

Hi –

 

I don't think we ever settled on a process (as simple as possible!) for avoiding conflict in vendor extensions. How about something like this:

- we ask OASIS to set up a publicy-visible extensions folder for us (somewhere…).

- any organization interested in avoiding extension conflicts distributes a document to the interop team specifying the proposed extensions.

- after resolving any issues raised by the interop team, the orgamization publishes the document into the extensions directory

- other organizations receive the email regarding the doc upload and have 2 weeks to review.

 

The goal here is not to have the KMIP TC become an extension registry – just to make it simpler for organizations who are creating extensions to have some level of confidence that their enumerations etc don’t conflict with someone else’s.  For organizations that are not part of the TC, we can include a short doc in the extensions directory that invites them to send their proposed extensions to the KMIP TC chairs for distribution to the interop team etc in the process above.

 

What do you think?

Regards,

Bob