I think it's great that you are going into these scenarios
in depth, it will result in a much higher value document.
One request I have is that if you could submit the issues
as you encounter them, or at least batched every couple
of days that would really help us get started addressing
them.
Given that the WS-SecurityPolicy technology is so new,
many of us do not have access to working systems that
we can test against, and so it is a bit like trying to be a
human compiler/parser. We will miss many obvious typos.
I am making an effort to get a working system myself,
however, it may take more than a week or two.
Therefore, any info we can get early, on the nature of the
problems, will help expedite the processing.
Thanks,
Rich
Anthony Nadalin wrote:
Once we finish testing all the scenarios we will open up issues on each problem we found so the TC can track these. The other issue we are looking at now is "are these valid message patterns" that show best practice.
Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122
Rich Levinson <rich.levinson@oracle.com>
Rich Levinson <rich.levinson@oracle.com>
04/04/2007 08:45 PM
To
Anthony Nadalin/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
cc
Greg Carpenter <gregcarp@microsoft.com>, "ws-sx@lists.oasis-open.org" <ws-sx@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject
Re: [ws-sx] WS-SX TC Minutes, April 4, 2007
Hi Tony,
Is there any chance you can provide us some kind of report of
what tests were done and what errors were found, which was the
basis for your reporting on the failure of the first 9 examples at today's
meeting?
Since the editors of the use cases doc have pretty much finished the
planned work, if we could get this information on the tests already
run, and what type of errors were found then we could determine what
corrective actions could be taken. It would be helpful if we could
get this info while people have the details fresh at hand.
Thanks,
Rich
> 6. Other business
>
> a. Examples Document:
>
> 2.4.1 Kerberos example. Currently has no message example. No volunteers have stepped forward to provide this and the suggestion of the editor is to publish with section 2.4.1 as is.
>
> Rich Levinson requested that the chairs put a discussion and possible CD vote on the agenda for 5the next meeting.
>
> Tony Nadalin noted that IBM had attempted to implement the document and the first nine examples fail. IBM will continue to test the updated version and file issues against examples that fail in the latest version.
>
>
>
>
