RE: [ws-sx] Issue 89: Minor editorial comments on security policy

["Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>]

[inline] 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com] 
> Sent: 10 July 2006 17:10
> To: Frederick Hirsch; ws-sx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [ws-sx] Issue 89: Minor editorial comments on security policy
> 
> Issue 89.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frederick Hirsch [mailto:frederick.hirsch@nokia.com] 
> Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 11:58 AM
> To: ws-sx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Cc: Hirsch Frederick; Marc Goodner
> Subject: NEW Issue: Minor editorial comments on security policy
> 
> PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL OR START A DISCUSSISON THREAD UNTIL
> THE ISSUE IS ASSIGNED A NUMBER.
> The issues coordinators will notify the list when that has occurred.
> 
> Protocol:  ws-sp
> 
> ws-securitypolicy-1.2-spec-ed-01-r07-diff
> 
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-sx/download.php/
> 18836/ws-securitypolicy-1.2-spec-ed-01-r07-diff.doc>
> 
> Artifact:  spec
> 
> Type: editorial
> 
> Title: Minor editorial comments on security policy
> 
> Description:
> a) Line 214, remove comma from "The intent of representing
> characteristics as assertions, is so that QName matching"

Agree.

> 
> b) Line 249
> s/protection encryption/encryption/
> in "The bindings are identified primarily by the style of protection
> encryption used to protect the message exchange."

Agree.


> 
> c) Line 653
> Change "Multiple instances of this element may appear within this
> assertion and should be treated as separate references in the
> signature." to "Multiple instances of this element may appear within
> this assertion and should be treated as separate references in a
> signature when WSS is used."
> i.e.,
> s/.$/ when WSS is used./
> 
> (Note that SignedElements may be satisfied using transport 
> security, in
> which case no special action is required if all is protected).

Propose 'when message security is used'

> 
> d) line 1460, are planning on defining the AbsXPath URI in the sp
> namespace, or do we have a candidate namespace in mind? Remember to
> replace TBD.

I'm assuming the final value of this URI will be fixed when we decide
final URIs for the namespace etc.

> 
> e) add at line 3545, "This section may not apply when transport level
> security is applied."
> (or more generally, clarify what is required when transport security
> used - ie endorsing signatures)

I believe the section does apply when transport security is used ( line
3556 for example ).

> 
> f) Remove Section F at line 3601. Stated earlier in document what is
> non-normative.

Agree.

> 
> Related issues: none
> 
> Proposed Resolution: see description
> 
> 
> regards, Frederick
> 
> Frederick Hirsch
> Nokia
> 
> 
>