[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [provision] Meeting minutes for 03/17/2003 PSTC Call
Hi all, sorry for missing the call this morning.
I think the committee should continue investing more with the alternate
proposal. A more provisioning centric model will benefit a SPML standard
more then the current DSML based plan. Admitting the DSML based plan is
a directory proven model, we're more convinced that provisioning should
be around the provisioning concepts like outlined in the alternate
proposal.
I don't know my current voting status, but if it counts: I vote against
the current proposal.
Thank You!
Matthias
-----Original Message-----
From: Gavenraj Sodhi [mailto:Gavenraj.Sodhi@businesslayers.com]
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 9:57 AM
To: 'Gearard Woods '
Cc: ''provision@lists.oasis-open.org ' '
I have fixed this within the corrected minutes I will be sending this
afternoon.
-Gavenraj
-----Original Message-----
From: Gearard Woods
To: Gavenraj Sodhi
Cc: 'provision@lists.oasis-open.org '
Sent: 3/17/03 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: [provision] Meeting minutes for 03/17/2003 PSTC Call
Raj,
Correct me if I'm wrong, and I know it's a minor point, but didn't Hal
abstain? You have him listed as "For" in the vote.
Gerry
|---------+----------------------------------->
| | Gavenraj Sodhi |
| | <Gavenraj.Sodhi@business|
| | layers.com> |
| | |
| | 03/17/2003 09:49 AM |
| | |
|---------+----------------------------------->
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: "'provision@lists.oasis-open.org '"
<provision@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: [provision] Meeting minutes for 03/17/2003 PSTC Call
|
|
|
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------|
All,
Here are the published meeting minutes from this week's PSTC Call
(03/17/03). Please let me know of any corrections.
Regards,
Gavenraj
**************************************************
Gavenraj Sodhi
Senior Technology Analyst
Business Layers
The eProvisioning Company(tm)
P: (949) 388-0088
M: (949) 350-8808
F: (949) 767-5851
www.businesslayers.com
**************************************************
#### pstc-minute-march17.htm has been removed from this note on March
17,
2003 by Gearard Woods
----------------------------------------------------------------
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>
Received: (qmail 7632 invoked by uid 60881); 19 Mar 2003 22:43:48 -0000
Received: from gewoods@us.ibm.com by hermes by uid 0 with qmail-scanner-1.15
(spamassassin: 2.43. Clear:SA:0(0.8/8.0):.
Processed in 0.322165 secs); 19 Mar 2003 22:43:48 -0000
X-Spam-Status: No, hits8 requiredŽ0
Received: from unknown (HELO e35.co.us.ibm.com) (32.97.110.133)
by mail.oasis-open.org with SMTP; 19 Mar 2003 22:43:48 -0000
Received: from westrelay04.boulder.ibm.com (westrelay04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.193.32])
by e35.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.8/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h2JMpZgJ013134
for <provision@lists.oasis-open.org>; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 17:51:35 -0500
Received: from d03nm129.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.193.82])
by westrelay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.8/NCO/VER6.5) with ESMTP id h2JMpYZt101000
for <provision@lists.oasis-open.org>; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 15:51:34 -0700
Subject: Outstanding technical issues
To: provision@lists.oasis-open.org
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.11 July 24, 2002
Message-ID: <OFE13D83A9.D30480AC-ON88256CEC.00633BAD-88256CEE.007D3EDE@us.ibm.com>
From: Gearard Woods <gewoods@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:48:00 -0800
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM129/03/M/IBM(Release 6.0 [IBM]|December 16, 2002) at
03/19/2003 15:51:34
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charsetì-ASCII
Now that a decision has been reached to continue with the current proposal,
I'd like to highlight some technical issues that have surfaced over the
past couple of weeks that should be addressed before the spec can be
considered to be viable. The most significant of these is the ability to
perform searches which return very large data sets. With DSMLv2/LDAP, this
is generally accomplished using a paged search control to "page" through
the result set. The current SPML has removed controls so this is not
currently an option unless, of course, controls are reintroduced and then I
imagine there would need to be some form of schema description for
controls. Large searches are common in our use cases for performing
reconciliation of target data with the provisioning system's version.
Obviously, if all of the target data must be accumulated in memory before
it can be sent to the client there is a significant scalability problem.
I find it hard to see how it would be accomplished without a major rework,
but without the ability to communicate complex types I think the spec is
just not practical for widespread use. We have a number of resources that
we provision today where, because of our use of DSML, we are obliged to
encode complex data structures in string attribute values. This is
obviously problematic for a number of reasons. My opinion is that
continued effort should be directed at this problem and the related problem
of the schema language, not just for immediate practical reasons but
because this will dictate a lot of the future capabilities of the SPML.
Another issue which has plagued our use of DSMLv2 is in the area of
internationalization. We touched on this last week, and there are many
approaches to this problem, but DSMLv2 makes it hard and the current SPML
is no better. It could be argued that internationalization is not the
focus of a spec like this, but the spec should not prohibit the use of
mechanisms that allow the system as a whole to communicate useful
human-readable information. In DSML, the inability to return multi-lingual
error messages is, I think, a weakness.
Gerry
Received: (qmail 9885 invoked by uid 60881); 20 Mar 2003 02:43:05 -0000
Received: from jbohren@opennetwork.com by hermes by uid 0 with qmail-scanner-1.15
(spamassassin: 2.43. Clear:SA:0(2.5/8.0):.
Processed in 0.181763 secs); 20 Mar 2003 02:43:05 -0000
X-Spam-Status: No, hits.5 requiredŽ0
Received: from unknown (HELO inet.opennetwork.com) (204.192.116.18)
by mail.oasis-open.org with SMTP; 20 Mar 2003 02:43:04 -0000
Received: from exlan1.opennetwork.com by inet.opennetwork.com
via smtpd (for [209.202.168.102]) with SMTP; 20 Mar 2003 02:51:57 UT
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset.tf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Subject: Bindings clarification...
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 21:50:53 -0500
Message-ID: <0E8099D386F3054B9435A683B13D74AE01E095@exlan1.opennetwork.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Bindings clarification...
Thread-Index: AcLui4XaRcx8uq53R2y5NS6J0BClbwûom: "Jeff Bohren" <jbohren@opennetwork.com>
To: <provision@lists.oasis-open.org>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Received: (qmail 28254 invoked by uid 60881); 20 Mar 2003 20:32:29 -0000
Received: from Darran.Rolls@waveset.com by hermes by uid 0 with qmail-scanner-1.15
(spamassassin: 2.43. Clear:SA:0(0.8/8.0):.
Processed in 0.178744 secs); 20 Mar 2003 20:32:29 -0000
X-Spam-Status: No, hits8 requiredŽ0
Received: from unknown (HELO hawaii.waveset.com) (168.215.162.242)
by mail.oasis-open.org with SMTP; 20 Mar 2003 20:32:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset.S-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [provision] Outstanding technical issues
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 14:40:20 -0600
Message-ID: <6244FCD1F88EC14BACDD2A319FD33824010690B8@hawaii.waveset.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [provision] Outstanding technical issues
Thread-Index: AcLuahz47DebRSbeQPqjp7X7HeNR6gAtjZzQ
From: "Darran Rolls" <Darran.Rolls@waveset.com>
To: "Gearard Woods" <gewoods@us.ibm.com>,
<provision@lists.oasis-open.org>
Folks
On these two issues:
1- Can someone explain the issues that prompted the removal of these
page controls as we detached from DSMLV2 (apart from simply not
including that schema). What would be the impact of putting them back?
2- Is it reasonable to say that the lang control of messaging cast into
an SPML exchange is not the responsibility of the protocol but rather
one of relationship and trust establishment between the client and
server?
=========================================================
Darran Rolls http://www.waveset.com
Waveset Technologies Inc drolls@waveset.com
512) 657 8360
=========================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Gearard Woods [mailto:gewoods@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 4:48 PM
To: provision@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [provision] Outstanding technical issues
Now that a decision has been reached to continue with the current
proposal,
I'd like to highlight some technical issues that have surfaced over the
past couple of weeks that should be addressed before the spec can be
considered to be viable. The most significant of these is the ability
to
perform searches which return very large data sets. With DSMLv2/LDAP,
this
is generally accomplished using a paged search control to "page" through
the result set. The current SPML has removed controls so this is not
currently an option unless, of course, controls are reintroduced and
then I
imagine there would need to be some form of schema description for
controls. Large searches are common in our use cases for performing
reconciliation of target data with the provisioning system's version.
Obviously, if all of the target data must be accumulated in memory
before
it can be sent to the client there is a significant scalability problem.
I find it hard to see how it would be accomplished without a major
rework,
but without the ability to communicate complex types I think the spec is
just not practical for widespread use. We have a number of resources
that
we provision today where, because of our use of DSML, we are obliged to
encode complex data structures in string attribute values. This is
obviously problematic for a number of reasons. My opinion is that
continued effort should be directed at this problem and the related
problem
of the schema language, not just for immediate practical reasons but
because this will dictate a lot of the future capabilities of the SPML.
Another issue which has plagued our use of DSMLv2 is in the area of
internationalization. We touched on this last week, and there are many
approaches to this problem, but DSMLv2 makes it hard and the current
SPML
is no better. It could be argued that internationalization is not the
focus of a spec like this, but the spec should not prohibit the use of
mechanisms that allow the system as a whole to communicate useful
human-readable information. In DSML, the inability to return
multi-lingual
error messages is, I think, a weakness.
Gerry
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]