OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

provision message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: Re: [provision] Proposed Charter

As Bill Games pointed out in an earlier note, SPML focuses on the "service"
to be provisioned whilte PSML focuses on the "service" that does the
If we are going to go with SPML, then we need to rework the wording of the
proposed charter to call the things that are being provisioned "services"
and the things that do the provisioning either "provisioning services" or
something else.  And we need to define the scope of "service".  Does it
encompass applications, "resources",  users, all of the above?  We need to
crisply define the elements of provisioning and how they relate to each
other; perhaps focusing on the use cases will help us with this.

Karl Gottschalk
tie 441-9611
ext. 919-543-9611
----- Forwarded by Karl Gottschalk/Raleigh/IBM on 12/06/2001 09:35 AM -----
                    twork.com            To:                                                                       
                    (Jeff Bohren)        cc:     provision@lists.oasis-open.org                                    
                                         Subject:     Re: [provision] Proposed Charter                             
                    08:41 AM                                                                                       

I think the charter that Darran put together is right on target, but there
is a slight disconnect between the charter and the proposed acronym, SPML.
like SPML (and I love Spam), but in the charter we refer to provisioning
resourcers and the acronym refers to provisioning services. This was the
same point I brought up before about SPML. It only works if we define a
"Service to be provisioned" as equivalent to a "Resource to be

We could use Resource Provisioning ML (RPML), but I think that is already
taken as another XML TLA. Note that I refer to these XML TLAs (3 letter
acronyms) as TLAs rather than FLAs (four letter acronyms) since the M and
the L are allways used together and can be considered to be a meta-acronym.

If we want to keep PSML as our TLA, then weshould tweak the charter to
to Services where we currently refer to Resources and define a Server to be
equivalent to a resource.

Jeff Bohren

Darran Rolls wrote:

> Colleagues
> In an effort to better clarify scope for PSTC efforts, I have added some
> further meat to the bones of the initial charter text.  Hopefully this
> will lead to a wider discussion on scope, the results of which can be
> used agree the charter and get started on the use cases and a
> requirements document.
> To qualify:
> - By resource hierarchies I am referring to organizations, directories
> or container hierarchies used to nest/contain resources and or
> user/identity definitions within a given resource
> -djr
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------
> The purpose of the OASIS Provisioning Services Technical Committee
> (PSTC) is to define an XML-based framework for exchanging user, resource
> and service provisioning information. This framework is commonly
> referred to as the Service Provisioning Markup Language (SPML).
> The Technical Committee will develop an end-to-end, open specification
> addressing the required semantics to exchange requests between
> cooperating provisioning services. A provisioning service is defined as
> any infrastructure component capable of consuming well formed SPML
> request.
> The finished specification is expected to include (but is not limited
> to) core XML schemas for the following:
> *       Query and exchange of available resources to provision to
> *       Query and exchange of available resource attributes
> *       Query and exchange of available resource identities
> *       Query and exchange of resource hierarchies
> *       Request and response for specific provisioning requests
> The following are also initial assumptions relating to the scope and
> nature of the SPML framework:
> *       SPML assumes a pre-existing trust model between the SPML
> requestor and the SPML  compliant service
> *       Encryption and message integrity should be available at the
> session level (via      SSL/TSL) and at the individual element level
> though XML-Encryption and XML-  Signatures
> The SPML specification will be developed with consideration of the
> following existing specifications (which are of public knowledge,
> accessible, and freely distributed).
> *       Active Digital Profile (ADPr)
> *       eXtensible Resource Provisioning Management (XRPM)
> *       Information Technology Markup Language (ITML)
> The PSTC will produce a set of one or more Committee Specifications that
> will cover the following (all of which are to be examined with respect
> to security considerations):
> *       Use cases and requirements
> *       Information model
> *       Protocol(s)
> *       Bindings
> *       Conformance
> The goal of the committee (subject to revision) is to submit a
> Specification to the OASIS membership for its approval by September of
> 2002.
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Darran Rolls                      http://www.waveset.com
> Waveset Technologies Inc          drolls@waveset.com
> (512) 657 8360                    PGP  0x8AC67C6F
> --------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

Jeff bohren
Product Architect
OpenNetwork Techologies
(727) 561-9500x219

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Powered by eList eXpress LLC