[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsrm] We need to reschedule WS-RM conference call
At 12:51 PM 7/8/2003, Tom Rutt wrote: >Alan Weissberger wrote: >I would prefer to go ahead with the call, and give a special "excused" absence >to people who go on an inteligence gathering mission in Redmond during our >conference meeting. >Perhaps you could arrange for a small room with call in for those who are >together >in Redmond. I agree. I think it's a bad idea to cancel the call. We all have had to step out of f2f's for con calls. In the past, it hasn't been a problem to get a conf room. Guess we'll see how harmonious things really are. >Anyway, who will be able to attend the Tuesday Teleconference? I will. If i have to stand outside on my cell phone. 'course i'm used to it :-) >I am able to attend and run the meeting. > >Please respond either if you know you will or know you will not atttend on >tuesday. > >Changing dates is not a good Idea. There are too many people with >schedule calls at various >times. > >Tom Rutt >WSRM Chair > >PS, If there were some comments from that group to be discussed on changes >to our >WS-Reliability requirements and spec to avoid "collisions" with their >architecture, we could >vote to let the experts at that meeting to Join our call for discussion >purposes. I would encourage people who are concerned to JOIN the TC and contribute that way, and have a clear understanding of the groundrules. jeff >>Tom >> >>In the interests of harmony and peace, I suggest postponing the call. >>How about later the same week? >> >>alan >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com> >>Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 09:34:48 -0400 >>To: Doug Bunting <Doug.Bunting@Sun.COM> >>Subject: Re: [Fwd: FW: [wsrm] RE: WS-ReliableMessaging Spec Workshop >>Invitation -- Please Forward as Appropriate] >> >> >>>I just realized, that Tuesday July 15 is the date for our WSRM >>>conference call >>>from 2:30 to 4:30 Pacific time. >>> >>>Tom Rutt >>>\ >>>Doug Bunting wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>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 specification?s >>>>>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 >>>> >>>> >>>-- ---------------------------------------------------- >>>Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com >>>Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting >>>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php >>> >>> >> >> >> >>Alan Weissberger >>2013 Acacia Ct >>Santa Clara, CA 95050-3482 >>1 408 863 6042 voice >>1 408 863 6099 fax >> >> >>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting >>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php >> >> > > >-- >---------------------------------------------------- >Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com >Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133 > > > > > >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]