[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: The Hal/David model
I have updated the domain model as best I can with the various emails, glossary, pdfs, etc. that are available. I don't yet have a usable copy of Visio, so the diagram will come from togetherJ for the near future. This is an imperfect job as I was a bit overwhelmed by the glossary and all the discussions on terminology differences. I started bottom-up (what glossary terms are required) rather than try to fit all the glossary terms in the diagram. I have liberally and flagrantly infringed copyrights by copying some material from the mailing list(s) and the glossary. I also copied from the glossary rather than refering to it, so that reviewers could combine all their comments together. I also added issues where definitions seemed vague/confusing/etc. This is complete in that every item and major relationship listed in the class diagram has a glossary entry. Process going forward: I expect that once we come to agreement on what we mean by terms, we can then push them back to the glossary. Please provide plenty of feedback to the group on this. Suggestion for the use case chair and subcommittee: Very soon we start only allowing conversations about terms that are in the glossary/domain model. I have been scanning various e-mails and notice many different synonyms, which I (and I'm sure other readers) would find confusing. I suggest that the set of requirements we are now balloting is a candidate for this. Terms like subject, policy-based disclosure, subject security attributes, parties, disclosure, run-time, sharing, etc. are not currently in the domain model, nor in the glossary. One person's run-time is another persons compile-time, etc. Let's define these terms or not use them at all. Dave Orchard XML Architect Jamcracker Inc., 19000 Homestead Dr., Cupertino, CA 95014 p: 408.864.5118 m: 604.908.8425 f: 408.725.4310 www.jamcracker.com - Sounds like a job for Jamcracker. > -----Original Message----- > From: Eve L. Maler [mailto:eve.maler@east.sun.com] > Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 9:04 AM > To: security-services@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: The Hal/David model > > > People who attended F2F #1 will recall the diagram that Hal > Lockhart drew > up on the whiteboard. It was something he and David Orchard > came up with > to help the use-case group settle on terminology and a rough > model of the > "things" we're discussing. Fred Moses worked from his notes > to create the > following electronic version, which reflects a bit more of > the discussion > we had that day: > > http://oasis-open.org/committees/security/docs/sstcach1.gif > > I'm sure we need more revisions to this diagram, but I would > like to work > towards consensus on the names for things and the > relationships between > them. Please use this thread to discuss it, and we will take > it up as a > topic at the 20 March telecon. > > For starters: > > - On Tuesday, we discussed separating each box so that > there's no hint of > chronology. This could mean, e.g., duplicating the "1" > callout so that > it's shown separately as the output of a credential collector > and the input > to an authentication authority. > > - I think the policy balloons should largely be in the "Not > SAML" layer > above. Or is the XACML discussion precisely about whether > some of these > balloons should be in scope? Can we give distinct names to > the different > types of policies? > > - What exactly do the input/output letters above refer to? > > - I think we *may* have consensus that the "SAML" box should > cover more > stuff to the left, e.g., it should cover the authentication > authority. Comments? > > - Do we have consensus that SAML should cover the PEP box? > > Thanks to Fred for making this version; I think Hal and David > should now > take up any revisions we ask for. > > Eve > -- > Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190 > Sun Microsystems XML Technology Development eve.maler @ east.sun.com > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word > "unsubscribe" in the body to: > security-services-request@lists.oasis-open.org >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC