Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 66 - Zero or multiple matches of correlation set

[Ron Ten-Hove <Ronald.Ten-Hove@Sun.COM>]

Assaf Arkin wrote:

I would also like to see a separation of concern between the process definition and the QoS requirements of the service and wouldn't rule out using existing mechanisms, e.g, the WSDL 1.2 features & properties framework.

    Use of the new WSDL 1.2 features and properties is an excellent suggestion for addressing this need. My only concern is that the business analyst functioning as author of the process will have to get involved in defining such features & properties (which can be very technical & detailed), or must use "out of band" techniques to communicate his high-level QoS needs to the technical modeller.

    If we cannot use WSDL 1.2 (and IIRC this is out of scope for the TC), what approach should we take that would preserve portability?  Recommend (in a normative fashion) the use of  CPP/A or other open standard?

    Just to make my previous suggestions more concrete, and borrowing from BPSS, what I had in mind was something like:

<receive partnerLink="ncname" portType="qname" operation="ncname"
         variable="ncname"? createInstance="yes|no"?
         isTamperProof="none|transient|persistent|transient-and-persistent"?
         isConfidential="none|transient|persistent|transient-and-persistent"?
         isAuthenticated="none|transient|persistent|transient-and-persistent"?
         standard-attributes>

where isTamperProof indicates the need to detect alterations to the message, isConfidential indicates the need to encrypt or obscure the message contents, and isAuthenticated indicates the need to verify the senders identity. An attribute value of transient means wire-level protocol protection, while persistent refers to security measures that are applied to the message before the message is sent to the communications handler.

    These security properties (isTamperProof, isConfidential, isAuthenticated) are meant to express the high-level business security needs only. It is up to implementations to assure that these requirements are meant. The security properties serve as constraints on the implementation's configuration / deployment system. How such constraints are met depends on the security features of the implementation's messaging infrastructure.

-Ron