Comments on WSFED TC charter proposal

[Jeff Hodges <Jeff.Hodges@neustar.biz>]

NeuStar strongly shares the observations, concerns, and suggestions about the
proposed WSFED charter, as noted by France Telecom/Orange, Nokia, NTT, and Sun, 
in their messages to this list:


France Telecom/Orange
http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200704/msg00000.html


Nokia
(msg not archived? Reproduced below for convenience)


NTT
http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200704/msg00005.html


Sun
http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200704/msg00007.html


We feel that the reasons for putting WS-Federation on the OASIS standards track 
are not clearly thought-through, both by the proposers and by OASIS, and are 
concerned with the further fragmentation of the web identity space, resulting 
in higher costs for vendors, customers, and service providers.


Jeff Hodges
NeuStar, Inc.



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	[oasis-charter-discuss] Re: [board] Proposed Charter for OASIS
Web Services Federation (WSFED) TC
Date: 	Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:48:46 -0400
From: 	Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
To: 	<oasis-charter-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org>
CC: 	Hirsch Frederick <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
References: 	<025d01c76a7c$e48af770$640fa8c0@espresso>



In response to the request for OASIS member comment on the proposed
WS-Federation charter [1] Nokia notes the following concerns.

The proposed WS-Federation charter:

1. Normatively references numerous private specifications that are
not standards and not in the standards process (or are only
submissions): WS-Transfer, WS-ResourceTransfer, WS-MetadataExchange,
WS-Eventing,

2. Normatively references IBM/Microsoft roadmaps as "the web
architecture",

3. Specifies that the WS-Fed TC will define how canonicalization is
to be performed with XML Signature, despite the existence of the W3C
XML Security Specifications Maintenance WG [2] for this purpose,

4. Incorrectly references WS-Trust and WS-SecureConversation
committee drafts rather than OASIS standards,

5. References the WS-Policy submissions rather than W3C WS-Policy CR,
and without mentioning that the WS-Policy Recommendations are to be
referenced when completed,

6. References committee specifications, instead of standards: WS-
ReliableMessaging, WS-Coordination, WS-AtomicTransation, WS-
BusinessActivity,

7. May need to better address the risk of all the chartered work
being completed within the 18 months allocated, and

8. Includes some strange characters in the charter text: "t [4
+AF0AOw- that".

Thank you

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia

[1] <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/members/200703/msg00018.html>

[2] <http://www.w3.org/2005/Security/xmlsig-charter>



---
end