OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

security-services message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: RE: [security-services] Comments on bindings-model-07

At 09:59 AM 12/11/01 -0500, Mishra, Prateek wrote:
> >>- The MUST in the "guidelines" section should be a SHOULD.
> >>(This is more
> >>consonant with the SHOULD that appears in bullet #3 of the process
> >>framework section, and we can't make people do anything in
> >>their private
> >>bindings/profiles.)
>I dont have a strong feeling about this. Here is one question though:
>let us suppose a hacked up bindings draft is submitted to the SSTC
>without any of the suggested structure
>in the "Guidelines" section. Doesnt the "SHOULD"
>help people argue around the need to follow the guidelines?

Well, it's up to our discretion to accept a binding/profile for 
registration, right?  If we want to make these a MUST for acceptance, then 
I suggest that the Guidelines section retain the word "Guidelines" in the 
header and say SHOULD, while the Process Framework section can say 
descriptions MUST follow the guidelines in order to be accepted.  That 
turns things sort of upside-down, but it would work for me...

>Appendix A deals with the issue of limitation on URL size in
>commercial browsers. There is no RFC that states this, so I felt
>this was a piece of "folk wisdom" that needed documentation. The
>Appendix reproduces the relevant documentation from MSFT and
>Netscape. Perhaps it just needs to be titled
>"URL Size Limits of Commercial Browsers" ?

That sounds great.  The text also needs to give some context, and the 
citations should be done as proper bibliographic references.  (I'll *try* 
to suggest something for this in the material that I still owe you...)

> >>- Is the point of Appendix B to be a non-normative hint about
> >>using form
> >>POST?  If so, I think it would be much more effective if it
> >>were inline,
> >>and its non-normative status indicated (e.g. by putting it in
> >>a "note").
>Your characterization is correct. Adding it as a note
>works for me (especially as it is relatively short).

I'll give this a try, too.

Eve Maler                                    +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center   eve.maler @ sun.com

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Powered by eList eXpress LLC