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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsrm message

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


Subject: Re: [Fwd: FW: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- Please Forward as Appropriate]


Colleen,
I undersand your concern about WS-RM.

I know that many pieces of WS functionality are related to each other
and that we should see a piece as a part of a big picture. I personally
respect you and IBM for the effort on GXA.
Through the discussion with other TC members, now I know they are
also aware that compatibility with related specs is important.

However, let me point out that the pieces do not have to be always tightly
coupled with each other.

In fact, now we are modifying WS-R ver 1.0 to OASIS WS-RM ver 1.0
and trying to make it orthogonal to (and, thus compatible with) other
specs (such as WS-Security, WS-Policy, WS-Addressing).
I would appreciate it if you could point out any specific issues in the current
spec. Your opinion is always welcome.

I do not think OASIS WS-RM would ruin your effort on GXA.
(Instead, it would accelerate realization of GXA)

Regards,
Junichi Tatemura
NEC Laboratories America, Inc.

PS.
Please understand that Alan was not offending you in his last message
but soliciting your collaboration.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Bunting" <Doug.Bunting@Sun.COM>
To: "Colleen Evans" <coevans@microsoft.com>
Cc: "wsrm" <wsrm@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: FW: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- Please Forward as Appropriate]


> Colleen,
> 
> If specifications are separated appropriately, separate and independent 
> development should be straight-forward.  Are you saying Microsoft has 
> done a poor job architecting GXA?  Composability of the results and 
> broad involvement in specification development should not be 
> contradictory aims.  Besides all that, one of the main enemies of 
> interoperability is competitive specifications.
> 
> Sun strongly agrees with the points Magdolna and Alan have already 
> raised.  If WS-ReliableMessaging, unlike at least BPEL4WS and 
> WS-Security, cannot be brought forward without the rest of the 
> architecture you are developing, fine.  Please submit the whole ball of 
> wax to this or another standards venue.  We believe specifications need 
> to be publicly and openly discussed and improved before they are 
> designated as standards.
> 
> thanx,
> doug
> 
> On 07-Jul-03 07:22, Tom Rutt wrote:
> > I forward this from Colleen Evans, from Microsoft.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > Subject:
> > FW: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- Please 
> > Forward as Appropriate
> > From:
> > "Colleen Evans" <coevans@microsoft.com>
> > Date:
> > Sun, 6 Jul 2003 21:18:30 -0700
> > To:
> > "Tom Rutt" <tom@coastin.com>, "Doug Bunting" <doug.bunting@Sun.com>
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Tom and Doug,
> > 
> > I received a reject from the TC list (only contributing members may 
> > post).  As I believe Magdolna and Alan are both out of the office, could 
> > one of you please forward this to the list?
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Colleen
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > *From:* Colleen Evans
> > *Sent:* Sunday, July 06, 2003 10:08 PM
> > *To:* 'Alan Weissberger'; magdolna.gerendai@nokia.com
> > *Cc:* wsrm@lists.oasis-open.org; Felipe Cabrera
> > *Subject:* RE: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation 
> > -- Please Forward as Appropriate
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Magdolna and Alan,
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > We are soliciting technical input that relates to improving technical 
> > aspects such as the performance, simplicity, robustness and 
> > composability of the WS-ReliableMessaging specification.  
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > A core requirement that drives the WS-ReliableMessaging specification is 
> > maintaining architectural cohesion within the specification and in 
> > relation to other web services specifications (WS-Security, Policy, and 
> > so on) and composability with other specifications that describe 
> > assurances (e.g. WS-Transactions).  It is therefore very hard to proceed 
> > on final design of any one particular specification without commensurate 
> > progress on the others.  Separating this specificationís process from 
> > the other Web Services specifications it composes with would harm the 
> > goals of composability and architectural coherence. A litmus test for 
> > the web services architecture is /bone fide/ interoperability and 
> > composability demonstrated between various implementations from several 
> > vendors. 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > The authors have organized this workshop to solicit public input and 
> > discussion on these specifications while they are early in their 
> > development.  We believe that specifications need to demonstrate their 
> > value before it is appropriate to consider designating them a standard. 
> > Successful workshops with community input facilitate reaching the 
> > interoperability and composability target needed to assure that these 
> > specifications meet their goals. As the specification matures and this 
> > extent of interoperability has been demonstrated, the authors will 
> > decide on the appropriate relation to standards organizations and/or any 
> > other specification efforts.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Colleen
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > *From:* Alan Weissberger [mailto:ajwdct@technologist.com]
> > *Sent:* Friday, July 04, 2003 9:27 AM
> > *To:* magdolna.gerendai@nokia.com; Colleen Evans
> > *Cc:* wsrm@lists.oasis-open.org; Felipe Cabrera
> > *Subject:* Re: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation 
> > -- Please Forward as Appropriate
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Colleen
> > 
> > What standards body are you planning to take your revised spec to?  As 
> > far as I know, OASIS is the only appropriate standards body for this work.
> > 
> > As I mentioned to you today, not only is the WS-RM TC open, but we ARE 
> > NOT about to rubber stamp the spec that was brought in to initiate the TC. 
> > 
> > The WS-RM TC members have spent all our time and efforts on establishing 
> > functional requirements.  These will be incorporate into the spec (with 
> > additions and deletions), as agreed.  For example, on last week's 
> > telecon we got rid of Message ID, as it was considered to be redundant 
> > with Group ID/Sequence number as a unique identifier.
> > 
> > At GGF8 in Seattle, I talked to Felipe Cabrera of Microsoft about 
> > participating in the WS-RM TC.  He was not very receptive and told me to 
> > read your spec, as it was clearly superior.
> > 
> > My opinion is that competing specs are harmful to the industry.  It 
> > would be great if the two WS RM'g specs could be consolidated/ merged to 
> > incorporate the best features of both.  This could take place in  the 
> > WS-RM TC if Microsoft and the other authors decided to participate.
> > 
> > I will attend your workshop on July 15, but will not offer any opinions 
> > or suggestions on how Microsoft and other authors should progress the 
> > work on Reliable Messaging.. 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Sincerely
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > alan
> > 
> > Alan Weissberger
> > 
> > Technical Consultant- NEC 
> > 
> > 2013 Acacia Ct
> > 
> > Santa Clara, CA 95050-3482
> > 
> > 1 408 863 6042 voice
> > 
> > 1 408 863 6099 fax
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From:
> > Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:13:22 +0200
> > To:
> > Subject: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- 
> > Please Forward as Appropriate
> > 
> > Hi Colleen,
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > I'm a bit surprised. And have a question based on the quote from the 
> > document you sent:
> > 
> >  "
> > 
> > The authors of the Specification intend to submit a revised version of 
> > the Specification to a standards body with a commitment to grant a 
> > royalty-free license to their necessary patents.  We need assurance that 
> > your feedback and discussions are consistent with that goal.
> > 
> > "
> > 
> > Why don't they join to the OASIS WS-RM TC to work on ONE WS-Reliability 
> > standard instead of going to standardize another one ? The OASIS WS-RM 
> > TC is open.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > br,
> > 
> > Magdolna
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > *From:* ext Colleen Evans [mailto:coevans@microsoft.com]
> > *Sent:* July 03,2003 3:46
> > *Subject:* WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop Invitation -- Please 
> > Forward as Appropriate
> > 
> > The authors of the recently-published WS-ReliableMessaging specification 
> > are hosting a 1-day meeting on July 15, 2003, 9am to 5pm, to discuss 
> > this specification.  This meeting will be held in Building 21, Columbia 
> > conference room on the Microsoft campus in Redmond, WA.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > This is an ad-hoc, open forum for 1) *SPECIFICATION AUTHORS* to share 
> > background information on the design of the specifications and to 
> > receive feedback and 2) *SOFTWARE VENDORS* to discuss their ideas about 
> > the practicality of implementing these and related Web Services 
> > specifications.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > We'd like this to be an open meeting and collect a broad range of ideas. 
> > If you are interested in participating in the discussions, please reply 
> > to this mail by *EOD 11 July 2003*.  Feel free to pass this invitation 
> > along to other potential participants, either in your company or elsewhere.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Note that in order to attend, the attached legal agreement MUST be 
> > signed by each attendee. 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Thank you and we look forward to seeing you soon.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Colleen Evans
> > 
> > XML Web Services Standards
> > Microsoft Corporation
> > 303 791-3090 or 425 703-9066
> > Mobile: 720 480-3919
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php
> 
> 
> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php
> 
> 


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