[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Raw chat log of 2010-04-22 telcon
Simon Holdsworth: Audio conference: Meeting Number: * 913929 * (press * before and after the digits) Phone numbers: Austria = Vienna 026822056419 Belgium = Brussels 022901709 China = Beijing 01052237296 Czech Republic = Prague 239014054 Denmark = Copenhagen 32714982 France = Lyon 0426840196 Marseille 0488915310 Paris 0170994364 France TollFree = 0800944795 Germany = Berlin 030726167296 Dusseldorf 021154073845 Frankfurt 069710445413 Hamburg 040809020620 Munich 089244432767 Stuttgart 0711490813212 Germany TollFree = 08006646304 India = Mumbai 02261501417 Ireland = Dublin 014367612 Italy = Milan 0230413007 Rome 06452108288 Turin 01121792100 Japan = Tokyo 0357675037 Netherlands = Amsterdam 0207965349 Poland Toll-free = 008001213648 Portugal Toll Free = 800782079 Russia = Moscow 84999222481 Russia Toll Free = 81080022074011 South Africa Toll-free = 0800982617 Spain = Barcelona 934923140 Madrid 917889793 Sweden = Stockholm 0850520404 Switzerland = Geneva 0225927186 UAE Toll-free = 8000440387 UK = Birmingham 01212604587 London 02071542988 Manchester 01612500379 UK Toll Free = 08003581667 USA = 19543344789 USA & Canada Toll Free = 18665289390 Simon Holdsworth: 1. Opening Introductions Roll call Scribe assignment Top of the scribe list: Plamen Pavlov SAP AG Tom Rutt Fujitsu Limited Eric Johnson TIBCO Software Inc. Anish Karmarkar Oracle Corporation Ashok Malhotra Oracle Corporation David Booz IBM Laurent Domenech TIBCO Software Inc. Martin Chapman Oracle Corporation Bryan Aupperle IBM Agenda bashing 2. Approval of the minutes from 15th April: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/37361/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202010-04-15.doc 3. Actions 20090211-4 [General] Write up HTTP binding use cases 20090709-2 [Editors] Update the WS binding schema appendix title to include 1.1 20100415-1 [Mike Edwards] Communicate desired changes to wireFormat and operationSelector elements, described in the resolution is issue BINDINGS-127, to the Assembly TC 4. New Issues No new issues 5. Discuss proposed TC schedule Updated following discussion on call of 8th April Consider date by which open issues are to be closed or deferred; also consider raising open vote to 2/3. 23rd April: Focus on issue BINDINGS-126 23rd April: cd vote on bindings specs and TA documents; Submit cd04 of bindings specs for second public review; continue discussion on production of test case documents/test cases 30th April: Initial test cases ready for review/discussion 13th May: Test cases complete 27th May: Submit cd01 of TA documents and test cases for public review 6. Open issue discussion http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-126 binding.ws should REQUIRE support for WS-Policy Raiser: Mike Edwards, owner: Unassigned Priority: 1 (must do before PR) Status: Proposed resolution in JIRA Latest email: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/201004/msg00027.html http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-111 binding.jms uses JMS URI scheme even though it is not a valid IETF internet draft Raiser: Eric Johnson, owner: Unassigned Priority: Unassigned Status: Pending response from Oracle with respect to approval of the IETF draft http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-60 JMS Default wire format insufficient to cover real world usage Raiser: Mike Edwards, owner: Simon Holdsworth Priority: 3 (deferred) Status: outline proposal in issue 7. AOB anish: Scribe: Anish Karmarkar anish: ScribeNick: anish anish: Topic: approval of 2010-04-15 minutes anish: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/37361/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202010-04-15.doc anish: Resolution: Minutes of 2010-04-15 telcon located at http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/37361/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202010-04-15.doc approved anish: Topic: AI review anish: 20100415-1 is done anish: other AIs are pending anish: Topic: Discuss proposed TC schedule anish: 23rd April: Focus on issue BINDINGS-126 23rd April: cd vote on bindings specs and TA documents; Submit cd04 of bindings specs for second public review; continue discussion on production of test case documents/test cases 30th April: Initial test cases ready for review/discussion 13th May: Test cases complete 27th May: Submit cd01 of TA documents and test cases for public review anish: Topic: issue 126 anish: Simon: some discussion around wordings around ws-policy Simon Holdsworth: Most recent email on issue 126: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/201004/msg00038.html anish: http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-126 binding.ws should REQUIRE support for WS-Policy Raiser: Mike Edwards, owner: Unassigned Priority: 1 (must do before PR) Status: Proposed resolution in JIRA Latest email: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/201004/msg00027.html anish: Simon: have to make progress on this issue to make progress on ws binding anish: Mike: would like a straw poll for the general direction anish: Eric not on the call anish: Mike: need to sort out the principles before wording anish: anish: fine with the direction Mike has proposed. but if we are going to raise the bar to require ws-policy, then we should require ws-addr assertion. This is verifiable. anish: Tom: agree with Anish. Not against requiring ws-policy but have to do in a way that makes sense Tom Rutt: If an implementation says they support ws-policy, but always ignores any policy assertion, this seems to be problematic anish: Mike: without support for at least one assertion, it is not testable. This is a fair criticism. Different runtimes and different situations have different requirements anish: ... even saying encryption assertion is required is hard anish: ... perhaps we should make it a SHOULD anish: anish: don't know of any stack that supports soap/wsdl/ws-policy but not addressing anish: Mike: we are talking about raising the bar and should be careful anish we can use the 'vote' mechanism in chat anish: Mike: for IBM, in case of embedded devices we don't use WS anish: ... perhaps that is the answer to not use WS for small devices anish: Simon: option: (a) CNA, (b) SHOULD, (c) MUST with support of ws-addr anish: Simon: let's go back to the actual concern in the issue anish: tom: can this be done via intents anish: mike: no anish: mike: are ppl happy to make ws-policy compulsory? anish: Martin: in assembly we resolved an issue that said you must support ws-policy anish: Mike: don't know which issue that is anish: Ashok: small devices won't use ws-policy or ws-addr, we are speaking about bigger devices that can support ws-policy and WS anish: Mike: the argument is that small devices need smaller stack, but our impl doesn't use WS (for embedded devices) anish: Mike: would there be stacks that don't support ws-policy anish: anish: legacy stacks, but i don't think we need to worry about it anish: Tom: BP 1.2 requires ws-addressing but not ws-policy anish: anish: two Qs we need to answer: is ws-policy is too high a bar. If the answer is no, then is ws-addr too high a bar? anish initiated a vote - please click the Vote button to cast your ballot: Would you like to require (MUST) support for WS-Policy (1) Yes (2) No This is a single choice vote. anish voted for: 1(Yes) Mike Edwards voted for: 1(Yes) Bryan Aupperle voted for: 1(Yes) Dave Booz voted for: 1(Yes) Simon Holdsworth abstains Laurent Domenech abstains Ashok voted for: 1(Yes) Tom Rutt abstains Plamen: Plamen abstains MartinC voted for: 1(Yes) anish ended the vote - results: Would you like to require (MUST) support for WS-Policy Tally Choice 6 Yes 0 No 3 Abstains anish: 6 yes and 4 abstains anish: mike: why don't we create a proposal for requiring ws-policy and then requiring ws-addr anish: The above was a strawpoll anish: simon: if we had another strawpoll asking if we need support for concrete policy would tell us if we need 2 alternatives (proposals) or not Simon Holdsworth initiated a vote - please click the Vote button to cast your ballot: If we mandate WS-Policy support, should we also madate support for a specific concrete policy? (1) Yes (2) No This is a single choice vote. anish voted for: 1(Yes) Mike Edwards voted for: 1(Yes) Tom Rutt voted for: 1(Yes) Ashok voted for: 1(Yes) Simon Holdsworth voted for: 1(Yes) Laurent Domenech voted for: 1(Yes) Mike Edwards: I think that we should mandate support for the policy assertion "Give Mike Edwards a vacation in the Carribean" Plamen voted for: 1(Yes) anish: :-) MartinC voted for: 1(Yes) Bryan Aupperle voted for: 1(Yes) Bryan Aupperle: But could you fly through the ash cloud? Simon Holdsworth ended the vote - results: If we mandate WS-Policy support, should we also madate support for a specific concrete policy? Tally Choice 9 Yes 0 No 0 Abstains Sorry - no vote is underway Mike Edwards: yes - ash cloud restrictions were removed yesterday Mike Edwards: I think Reykjavik gets the ash cloud later this week ;-) anish: simon: we now have enough to generate a proposal Tom Rutt: the fascinating aspect about this flight grounding is that there were never tests done on effects of ash on airplane engines. The likelihood of a area wide ash cloud was so small they did not engineer for it. anish: Simon: we also need to resolve the issue of wsdl generation anish: ACTION: anish to create a proposal for requiring support for ws-addr assertion and hand it to Mike for updating the proposal for requiring support for ws-policy when it appears in wsdl anish: simon: need to verify that the issue resolutions are applied correctly anish: ... to move to a CD and PR anish: simon: any volunteers for checking the JMS/JCA drafts anish: ACTION: Bryan to review JCA draft by next call anish: Mike: have a deadline for a vote and wait for feedback anish: Simon: deadline till next thursday for JMS/JCA binding anish: ... to raise problems with issue resolution application anish: Topic: AOB and stragglers anish: meeting adjourned
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]