Prellim Minutes of 9/7 Teleconf

[Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>]

The prelim WSRM TC minutes from 9/7 teleconf are attached.

Please post any corrections to the list before Friday.

Tom Rutt

-- 
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt	email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133

Title: Draft Agenda to WSRM TC Conference Call – May 06, 2003

Prelim Minutes WSRM TC Conference Call –September 7, 2004

 

The meeting of the WSRM TC took  place by teleconference 

Tuesday, Sep 7, 2004, from 5:30 to 7:30 PM Eastern Standard Time

 

1         Draft Agenda:

 

    1 Draft Agenda to WSRM TC Conference Call

    2 Roll Call

    3 Minutes Discussion

    3.1 Appointment of Minute Taker

    3.2 Approval of previous meeting minutes –

    4 Action Item Status Review

    5 Status of Member vote submission

    6 Status of Interop SC

    7 Discussion of Potential Version 2.0 Features

    8 Discussion of Amended Charter of WSRM TC

    9 Discussion of future meeting schedule

 

2         Roll Call

Attendance:

First Name	Last Name	Role	Company
Joseph	Chiusano	Member	Booz Allen Hamilton
Jeff	Turpin	Member	Cyclone Commerce
Jacques	Durand	Secretary	Fujitsu
Kazunori	Iwasa	Secretary	Fujitsu
Tom	Rutt	TC Chair	Fujitsu
Robert	Freund	Member	Hitachi
Eisaku	Nishiyama	Member	Hitachi
Nobuyuki	Yamamoto	Member	Hitachi
John	Fuller	Observer	Individual
Junichi	Tatemura	Member	NEC Corporation
Alan	Weissberger	Member	NEC Corporation
Abbie	Barbir	Member	Nortel Networks
Mark	Peel	Secretary	Novell
Pete	Wenzel	Member	SeeBeyond
Doug	Bunting	Secretary	Sun Microsystems
Tony	Graham	Member	Sun Microsystems
Chi-Yuen	Ng	Member	University of Hong Kong

 

 

 Meeting is quorate.

 

3         Minutes Discussion

3.1      Appointment of Minute Taker

Tom Rutt will take minutes.

 

Minutes will serve to record issue resolutions.

3.2      Approval of previous meeting minutes

The minutes of the Aug 24 teleconf are posted at:

 

http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/8988/MinutesWSRMTC082404.htm

 

Alan moved to approve, Abbie seconded.

 

No opposition, minutes are approved.

 

1         Status of Action Items

 

1.1      Action 052503-1 (Tom Rutt) pending

Tom took an action item to complete the status column of 

pre public review issues list, with correct URLs.

 

1.2      Action 060104-5 (Jacques) Pending

 

Action: Jacques, will propose further edits, on the FAQ for composability.

 

Still open, low priority

 

 

2         Status of Member vote submission

·  Submission of WS-Reliabiliity CD 1.086 for OASIS Member Vote

From Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com> on 3 Sep 2004 13:55:28 -0000

 

They will process submission on Sep 15, and the vote will go out on October 1.

 

After the comments are received, the TC needs to review the comments.

 

Alan, we should categorize the comments for discussion.

 

Doug: that may be unnecessary; we do not know how many comments we will.

 

Tom It depends on how many comments we get.

3         Status of Interop SC

Bob F stated we have four companies (same as those referenced in the submission) that have expressed interest in either the internal or external interop demonstrations.  It would be good to expand beyond four.

 

Bob is asking what the earliest date for an interop, October timeframe is possible.

 

Jeff T: If it is November, Cyclone Commerce might be able to do it.

 

Bob has been sending the solicitations on the entire WSRM list.

 

Jamie Clark, of OASIS Staff, joined the call:  He dated that Dee Shur needs to be contacted regarding additional participants.  She may be able to help.

4         Discussion of Potential Version 2.0 Features

 

Tom: in our work on version 1.1, we put several requested feature off to future versions of the protocol.

 

One example would be new features for version 2, supporting reliable request/response interactions, with reliability for both directions of transfer..

 

Jamie: there are immediate bandwidth sucks after a committee has its standard approved.  You are going to need to allocate time to just answer questions from other organizations on the first version of the standard. The short term will be too busy to start work on version 2.

 

 

Action: Tom will try to find, from previous minutes, a list of features we have put off for future versions and will post it to the list for discussion.

 

Tom: A set of implementers guides is another area to work on.

5         Discussion of Amended Charter of WSRM TC

Jamie Clark:  the charter fulfills two choices.  You may not have to modify the charter, but it might be good to do so.

 

The Charter is a scoping discussion.  I help OASIS members decide what work is going on in a committee.

 

Changing deliverables does not necessary broaden the scope of the committee.

 

The text in the charter about the input documents and deliverables need to be kept up to date.

 

WSRM committee has listed its current deliverables are the requirements document, and the first version of the standard.

 

Jamie stated we could update our charter to add new deliverabiles.

 

It does not make a sense to change the charter until a new document, like a 2.0 version, or use cases and other documents, are in the plan for the committee.  Once these deliverables are understood, it would be a good time to update the charter to reflect this decision.

 

Jamie stated this is a good to re-examine our deliverables, and once we understand.

 

The TC should sort this out before the charter is changed.   The TC could also decide to stop working, and then the TC would go away.

 

Alan W: On Composability, many people have talked about WS-reliability and WS security will compose, but I do not know how that works.  One thing needed in OASIS is cross TC liaisons, is there anything in the OASIS pipeline about composability of WS reliability and WS-security.

 

Jamie: Composability is a big word that many people consider differently.  I am concerned about this word, but I notice it is in your charter.   Now that we have both standards in a more stable state, this may need to be re addressed.  From my understanding, WS-Security should be possible to use it with anything else.  If something in the WS Reliability would not work with WS-Security I would be surprised.  I would assume that a wss profile for foo would be able to do it.

 

Alan: I am concerned that we know the details on how to use WS-Security with our headers.

 

Jamie: There has to be agreed profiles on how to use things together.  Also, need to know to use WS-reliability with some other transaction standard.  You would need to know how to work them together.

 

Tom: some of this work could be done in a group like WS-I.

 

Alan: WS-I has problems with competing specifications in this area.  They might not be in a position to do such work for a long time.

 

Tom: I agree we are not now in a position to consider WS-I work in this area.

 

Jamie: I think a better forum for reconciliation is like the model in WSS , to do a joint committee work for a profile of the security standard. 

 

Tom: I agree that this WSRM TC could start working on scenarios for using WSS with WS-Reliability.  However, it does not seem to work to just ask WSS people to review our standard to determine the best ways to compose it with theirs.

 

Jamie: there have been cases where OASIS TC have discovered overlaps which had to be resolved between them.  Rules of precedence have been proposed in such cases.

 

Jamie: ws security takes the approach that you are attaching security to a bunch of messages.  They are assuming that you have understood why you are using a set of keys etc.  They need to exchange various security information before using WS security. Reliability of exchange of this security information is another area of composition.  Can WS-R be used in this exchange?

 

Alan : a joint meeting with WS security would be useful.

 

Tom: we first need to understand what the potential issue may be before a joint meeting.

 

Tom: A discussion of composibility of WS-Reliability with WS-Security seems to be a topic which we should work on.

 

Tom : this should be the first topic we should work on for an implementers guide.

 

Tom: two items we discussed at this meeting for future work are:

• an implementers guide with focus on ws security, and
• a list of potential feature for protocol Version 2.

6         Discussion of future meeting schedule

Assuming we have the member vote over in Early November, a Second week of Nov f2f seems like a good time.

 

The First Week of November is the WS-I meeting and would not be a good time for a meeting.

 

The third week of November is XML 2004, in DC is 15^th thru 19^th.

 

Bob: this seems like it could be a possibility for a public demo in DC at XML 2004, with a private interop the second week of November, during the F2F.

 

Agreed that the best time for f2f is Second week of November.   Two days would be needed for the demo group, with 1 or two days to resolve OASIS member comments.

 

Best place would be the Bay area of California.  San Jose, Sunnyvale.

 

Tom: we should try to tie down the next face to face meeting dates at the next teleconference.  Two or three days would suffice.

 

Members should consider hosting the meeting in Bay area.

 

Agree to continue with one hour meetings every two weeks.

 

Meeting Adjourned at 6:30 PM EDT.