RE: [PSTC] RE: [provision-comment] (PSTCFAQv01) - Version 1 of PS TCFAQ

[Hal Lockhart <hal.lockhart@entegrity.com>]

> In terms of the definition of "provisioning", this should be 
> not constrained
> as PSTC has not been officially recognized until Nov. 12, 
> when the major
> debates will begin, but the actual processes conducted in 
> provisioning will
> be defined during the process of PSTC going forth.

Well yes and not. If we have a charter that says this group will work on
provisioning, we have to have at least a rough idea of what is included or
not, if for no other reason than so people can decide if they want to
participate or not.

>  An 
> attempt was taken to
> define or give an overview of Provisioning and why a standard 
> is needed for
> open interoperability, which is included in the first link 
> below.  It also
> mentions other standards being looked at including the three major
> specifications submitted to PSTC as linked below (docs are 
> available at
> those links).

Thanks a lot, I hadn't seen these.
 
> Introduction to PSTC:
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/provision/Intro-102301.doc
> Active Digital Profile (ADPr) - http://www.adpr-spec.org
> eXtensible Resource Provisioning Management (XRPM) - 
> http://www.xrpm.org
> Information Technology Markup Language (ITML) - http://www.itml.org
> 
> The scope of the group is provided within the Proposed 
> Charter, which is
> included in the "Introduction to PSTC" document above.

Well the Phil Schacter slides and the Use cases (and especially the object
model) are pretty clearly focused around users, user profiles, user
entitlements, enabling a user to use a service. The "Intro" doc is
interesting. First is says:

In our context, provisioning refers to the “preparation beforehand” of IT
systems’ “materials or supplies” required to carry out some defined
activity.

But then it offers the much more limited definition found in the FAQ.

Overall I am content to limit the scope in this way, but I suggest it will
be clearer to people who have been using the term provisioning for the last
50 years if you call this "User Provisioning" or "Account Provisioning" or
"Identify Provisioning" or something of the sort. 

This is not what people at Verizon or Lucent mean by provisioning. I am just
trying to avoid potential confusion and people working at cross purposes.
 
> I wanted to address some of your comments (indented below 
> your comment):
> 
> a) language to make this more precise
>         - Debate within formal group will start November 12th 
> where the
> language may be discussed for preciseness or functions of 
> where provisioning
> is or may be invoked.
> 
> b) a set of examples of what should be in scope and what 
> should be out of
> scope
>         - Use Cases are available on the XRPM site, www.xrpm.org for
> examples of system - to - system provisioning and system - to 
> - resources.
> 
> c) a completely alternative view (e.g. all provisioning is in scope)
>         - Not exactly sure what you are looking for here.  
> Please elaborate.


In my orginal message I said a) or b) or c). Any one would have been
sufficient.

Regards,

Hal