RE: [provision] Groups - pstc-minutes-09142004.htm uploaded

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

The consensus from the F2F is that we can't specify that PSO-IDs are
immutable. But it also seems to be the consensus that they should be if
possible. Those two statements are not mutually exclusive. What they
mean together is that:

1) The core protocol and spec have to allow for mutable PSO-IDs
2) The core spec should recommend that PSO-IDs be immutable

Jeff Bohren
Product Architect
OpenNetwork Technologies, Inc
 
Try the industry's only 100% .NET-enabled identity management software.
Download your free copy of Universal IdP Standard Edition today. Go to
www.opennetwork.com/eval.
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Gary P Cole [mailto:Gary.P.Cole@Sun.COM] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 11:52 AM
To: gavenraj.sodhi@ca.com
Cc: provision@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [provision] Groups - pstc-minutes-09142004.htm uploaded

>
>
> - Structure & mutability of PSO-ID's...
>
>             - Some provisioning services will not maintain immutable 
> GUIDs (e.g., Directory with no GUIDs)
>
>             - Core verbs of add and modify and change parent each need

> capability to return PSO-ID
>
>                         - *Should specify in the Core Spec that they 
> should use Immutable IDs*
>
Since I missed the discussion I must ask what this last part means.  
Does it mean that we prefer immutable IDs?  Jeff Bohren made a pretty 
compelling case at the Face-to-Face for mutable IDs...


To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/provision/members/leave_wor
kgroup.php.