Re: [provision] A Proposal for using DSML for Provisioning

[jbohren@opennetwork.com (Jeff Bohren)]

Tony,

You correct about the limitations of DSML. In the first draft of my proposal
I pointed out that DSML can not directly support SPML User Cases 2, 6, 7,
and 10, where the requestee generates some of the information from the
request. My idea to handle that, was to create an extension to DSML called a
addPartialRequest and a corresponding addPartialResponse. The
addPartialRequest would not require a DN and the addPartialResponse would
have the equivalent of a DSML search repsonse entry in addition to the
results. this would contain the information derived from the request.

I had planed to post a revised draft for the Proposal to the group today (by
coincidence). I will try to do that today.

Jeff B.

Tony Gullotta wrote:

> I like DSML, but I'm afraid that all by itself, there may be some small
> points that won't fit in completely. For example, requesting a service
> passing only the type of service you are subscribing for, then in the
> result message sent back later, the PSP would provide the subscriber his
> user id, password, etc. I'm not sure if DSML accounts for an interaction
> like that. Do you think we can cover these fringe requirements with DSML
> alone? Maybe DSML can be used more as a format for payload information
> that we can wrap with a more provisioning flexible operational protocol?
>
> Tony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jbohren@opennetwork.com [mailto:jbohren@opennetwork.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 10:37 AM
> To: mpolan@ca.ibm.com
> Cc: provision@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [provision] A Proposal for using DSML for Provisioning
>
> That is pretty much the gist of it, as I see it. There is an implied
> third party, which is the party (most likely a system) that makes the
> request at the
> protocol layer. Suppose that the RA is a provisioning system (system A)
> in one domain and the PSP is a provisioning system (system B) in
> another. There is
> a supervisor user named jdoe that has rights to request a PSTD for
> jsmith. Now the trust relationships would be:
>
> Systems A and B have a trust relationship.
> System A has the rights to impersonate user jdoe.
> jdoe has the rights to request a PSTD for user jsmith
>
> So then the flow might be:
>
> 1) jdoe requests a PSTD for jsmith in System A.
> 2) System A sends a DSML addRequest to System B, using the authRequest
> tag to refer to jdoe.
> 3) System B processes the request and sends a response to System A.
> 4) System A sends a response to jdoe.
>
> In this case System B has knowledge of all three parties involved in the
> request.
>
> Although these are interesting questions, does anyone have any comments
> about the overall notion of using DSML for provisioning? Is this
> something that
> makes sense?
>
> Jeff B.
>
> mpolan@ca.ibm.com wrote:
>
> > Can I play this back to make sure I understand?
> >
> > The RA requests a PSTD for the principle specified in the request
> data.  So
> > there will be authorization of
> > 1) The RA as entitled to request PSTDs
> > 2) the RA as entitled to act for the principle in requesting this PSTD
> in
> > particular
> > 3) The principle of being entitled to have the new account allocated
> >
> > Is that right?
> >
> > I've been wondering if a 3rd party should be added as a parameter to
> this
> > and related requests.  The use cases support the delegation of request
> -
> > that is a PSP or PST becoming an RA in order to complete a
> provisioning
> > request, right?  If a request has been delegated, might it be
> necessary to
> > also know the original RA?
> >
> > Mike Polan
> > IBM Canada Ltd
> >
> > |---------+---------------------------->
> > |         |           jbohren@opennetwo|
> > |         |           rk.com (Jeff     |
> > |         |           Bohren)          |
> > |         |                            |
> > |         |           07/24/2002 02:31 |
> > |         |           PM               |
> > |         |                            |
> > |---------+---------------------------->
> >
> >-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---|
> >   |
> |
> >   |       To:       Tony Gullotta <TGullotta@access360.com>
> |
> >   |       cc:       provision@lists.oasis-open.org
> |
> >   |       Subject:  Re: [provision] A Proposal for using DSML for
> Provisioning
> |
> >   |
> |
> >   |
> |
> >
> >-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---|
> >
> > Tony,
> >
> > No, I would not say that is true in general, although it might be in
> some
> > cases. In use case 5 the RA is the requestor that is requesting a PSTD
> on
> > the behalf of a specific principle. The principle that is used for
> > authenticating request at the protocol (i.e. SOAP) may or may not be
> the
> > principle of the RA. If it is not, then the authRequest tag must be
> used to
> > specificy that the principle upon which authroization decisions are to
> be
> > made is the principle of the RA. Obviously the principle that was used
> for
> > the protocol must have privalege to impersonate the RA.
> >
> > Jeff Bohren
> >
> > Tony Gullotta wrote:
> >
> > > So are you saying that the principal used for authentication of the
> DSML
> > > request would be used to identify the end-user being provisioned
> when
> > > communicating between the RA and PSP. In example 5 then,
> provisioning
> > > the email account jsmith@acme.com would be linked back to the
> identity
> > > cn=John Smith,o=acme.com for authorization of the provisioning
> request.
> > > Or to put it another way, the PSP would authorize that cn=John
> > > Smith,o=acme.com could have the email account before provisioning
> it.
> > >
> > > Tony
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: jbohren@opennetwork.com [mailto:jbohren@opennetwork.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 9:44 AM
> > > To: provision@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > Subject: [provision] A Proposal for using DSML for Provisioning
> > >
> > > Since I keep bringing this up, it is only fair that I put forth some
> > > concrete details. Attached is a rough draft I did this morning for a
> > > proposal for using DSML for provisioning. Bear in mind that this is
> a
> > > very rough draft, but I think this gives us a good starting point
> for a
> > > discussion on the issue.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jeff Bohren
> > > Product Architect
> > > OpenNetwork Techologies
> > > jbohren@opennetwork.com
> > > (727) 561-9500x219
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Bohren
> > Product Architect
> > OpenNetwork Techologies
> > jbohren@opennetwork.com
> > (727) 561-9500x219
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> jbohren@opennetwork.com
> (727) 561-9500x219
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
jbohren@opennetwork.com
(727) 561-9500x219