Proposals for MakeConnection issues summary

There has been such a flurry of mails on MakeConnection today (apologies) I thought I try to provide a summary from my point of view. Below I’ve listed the issues related to MakeConnection, how each of the options on the straw poll relates (except the withdrawn proposal 1) and any relevant notes. In particular I’m calling out where each side agrees that something further needs to be done.

I apologize that there seem to be two new issues in the table below. I view them more as open questions that may or may not have issues behind their answers. I am calling these out as proposal 2 does not have any open questions related to those points. The open questions are only in relation to the current spec.

Issue	Close No Action	Proposal 2	Notes
1	Solved	Solved
15	Open	Open	Both sides seem to agree that an assertion for MakeConnection is an idea worth exploring. No proposals on the table yet.
27	Open	Open	Both sides seem to doubt there is an issue here. This might be close with no action either way. If it isn’t there may only be clarifying text required.
28	Open	Closed	No proposal if 1 is closed with no action
29	Open	Closed	No proposal if 1 is closed with no action
30	Open	Closed	No proposal if 1 is closed with no action
31	Open	Closed	No proposal if 1 is closed with no action
WSA WG dependency*	Open	Closed	CR33 is still not closed. There is still a potential impact on the RM anon URI. Earlier actions taken in relation to CR33 certainly do not support the notion of other specs defining their own anonymous URIs any longer. Proposal 2 does not have any WSA WG dependencies as it does not define its own special URI requiring support from that WG’s outputs.
Potential security composition issue**	Open	Closed	There has been an open question in the implementation subcommittee for a month on how to relate the proper token to a sequence created through the use of MakeConnection. There may not be an issue with the current spec, but there is the open question. Proposal 2 has advice that a new security token should be issued for any new sequence created through MakeConnection so there isn’t an open question there.

References follow.

Regards,

Marc g

References:

Current straw poll ballot for what to do about MakeConnection:

http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/ballot.php?id=1147

*http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/6/11/06-ws-addr-minutes.html

The WG decided here to issue an errata to strike the text in the WSA SOAP binding suggesting other specs define their own anonymous URIs.

** http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-rx-implement/200610/msg00010.html

The open thread on how to relate a security token to a sequence created through the use of MakeConnection.

Current MakeConnection issue threads (links are to beginning of thread):

1 – I’m not sure which one to point to for this, there’s a bunch. Nothing as fresh as today.

Description: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/pr/Issues.xml#i001

15 – no thread yet, the idea of an assertion has been discussed under some of the other issue threads.

Description: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/pr/Issues.xml#i015

27 - http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-rx/200611/msg00125.html

Description: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/pr/Issues.xml#i027

28 - http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-rx/200611/msg00120.html

Description: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/pr/Issues.xml#i028

29 - http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-rx/200611/msg00123.html

Description: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/pr/Issues.xml#i029

30 - http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-rx/200611/msg00122.html

Description: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/pr/Issues.xml#i030

31 - http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-rx/200611/msg00121.html

Description: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/pr/Issues.xml#i031

ws-rx message