RE: [provision] SPML FAQ

["Jeff Bohren" <jbohren@opennetwork.com>]

Title: Message

We don't acutally have a WSS Bindings in the SPML Specification. In the SOAP Binding we suggest that WSS should be used for security. We can say that we have designed the SPML spec to be "WSS Friendly". For instance we made the Request ID an xsd:ID type so that it be referenced in WSS digital signature.

 

Below is a new version of the faq that includes references to SAML, WSS, XML DSig, and XML Encryption:

 

 

 

 

What is the need for this specification?

 

One of the biggest challenges in provisioning is adapting to a disparate set of protocol and methodologies. This poses a challenge to both provisioning vendors and implementers of custom provisioning systems. The industry would benefit if some level of standardization could be brought to bear on this problem.

 

Who should be involved in this development?

 

Any vendor that develops provisioning systems or intends to integrate with provisioning systems. Also any organization developing custom built provisioning solutions. Any organization involved in identity management should also participate.
 
 
Who will benefit from this work and how?
 
Both provisioning vendors and their customers will benefit from increased standardization. The will result in lower costs, quicker implementations, and a wider range of supported systems.
 
 
How does this work compare with related efforts at other standards organizations? When will this specification be completed?
 
The SPML 1.0 specification is built on the OASIS DSMLv2 specification, although it is focused on provisioning. Additionally there is a relationship, although not an overlap, between SPML 1.0 and federated identity standards, such as Project Liberty. The SPML 1.0 specification support identifying principles using SAML and Project Liberty standards. Additionally, the SPML 1.0 specification has been designed to accommodate the use of WSS, XML Digital Signatures, and XML Encryption.
 
The SPML 1.0 specification has been approved as a committee specification of the PS TC and will soon be submitted to OASIS at large.

 

 

 

 

Jeff Bohren

Product Architect

OpenNetwork Technologies, Inc

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Sodhi, Gavenraj S [mailto:Gavenraj.Sodhi@ca.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 5:08 PM
To: Darran Rolls; Jeff Bohren; provision@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [provision] SPML FAQ

I think we should.

 

-Raj

 

 

Gavenraj Sodhi, MBA

Computer Associates

Product Manager, eTrust

Office:  +1 310 957 3632 (internal: 63632)

Mobile:  +1 949 350 8808

gavenraj.sodhi@ca.com

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Darran Rolls [mailto:Darran.Rolls@waveset.com]

Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 1:23 PM

To: Jeff Bohren; provision@lists.oasis-open.org

Subject: RE: [provision] SPML FAQ

 

Good first draft...

 

Should we add to question/answer 4 details on our WSS binding and

inclusion of SAML assertions as identifiers?

 

=========================================================

Darran Rolls                      http://www.waveset.com

Waveset Technologies Inc          drolls@waveset.com

(512) 657 8360                    

=========================================================

 

 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Jeff Bohren [mailto:jbohren@opennetwork.com]

> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 6:39 PM

> To: provision@lists.oasis-open.org

> Subject: RE: [provision] SPML FAQ

>

> Here is my stab it this:

>

> What is the need for this specification?

>

> One of the biggest challenges in provisioning is adapting to a

disparate

> set of protocol and methodologies. This poses a great challenge to

both

> provisioning vendors and implementers of custom provisioning systems.

> The industry would benefit if some level of standardization could be

> brought to bear on this problem.

>

>

>

> Who should be involved in this development?

>

> Any vendor that develops provisioning systems or intends to integrate

> with provisioning systems. Also any organization developing custom

built

> provisioning solutions. Any organization involved in identity

management

> should also participate.

>

>

>

> Who will benefit from this work and how?

>

> Both provisioning vendors and their customers will benefit from

> increased standardization. The will result in lower costs, quicker

> implementations, and a wider range of supported systems.

>

>

>

> How does this work compare with related efforts at other standards

> organizations? When will this specification be completed?

>

> The SPML 1.0 specification is built on the OASIS DSMLv2 specification,

> allthough it is focused on provisioning. Additionally there is a

> relationship, although not an overlap, between SPML 1.0 and federated

> identity standards, such as Project Liberty.

>

> The SPML 1.0 specification has been approved as a committee

> specification of the PS TC and will soon be submitted to OASIS at

large.

>

>

> Jeff Bohren

> Product Architect

> OpenNetwork Technologies, Inc

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Darran Rolls [mailto:Darran.Rolls@waveset.com]

> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 12:31 PM

> To: provision@lists.oasis-open.org

> Subject: [provision] SPML FAQ

>

>

> Folks

>

> OASIS is changing the Kavi based system to paste up an FAQ section for

> each TC.  Here are the proposed Q's, does someone want to take the

lead

> on drafting some A's?

>

> What is the need for this specification?

> Who should be involved in this development?

> Who will benefit from this work and how?

> How does this work compare with related efforts at other standards

> organizations? When will this specification be completed?

>

> =========================================================

> Darran Rolls                      http://www.waveset.com

> Waveset Technologies Inc          drolls@waveset.com

> (512) 657 8360

> =========================================================

>

>

>

> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting

>

http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/provision/members/leave_wor

> kgroup.php

>

>

> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting

> http://www.oasis-

> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/provision/members/leave_workgroup.php

 

 

You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/provision/members/leave_workgroup.php