[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsrm] Prelim Minutes for 5/16 Teleconf
On May 17, 2005, at 3:48 PM, Tom Rutt wrote: > The prelim minutes are attached. > > Please post any corrections to the list by the end of this week. > > Tom Rutt > WSRM TC Chair > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------- > Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com > Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133 > > > Prelim Minutes for WSRM TC Conference Call –May 17, 2005 > > > The meeting of the WSRM TC took place by teleconference > > Tuesday, May 17, 2005, from 5:30 to 6:30 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 WS-Reliability Specification > > 6 Interop SC Future activities > > 7 Next Step Documentation > > 7.1 Editorial Clarifications and Errata > > 7.2 Implementation Guidelines > > 7.2 Future Enhancement Requests > > 8 Composability with other WS-Specs > > 9 ws reliability PAS progression > > 10 Liaison with WS-RX TC > > 11 Discussion of Future Meetings > > 11 New business > > > > 2 Roll Call > > Attendance: > > First Name > > Last Name > > Role > > Company > > Jacques > > Durand > > Secretary > > Fujitsu Limited* > > Kazunori > > Iwasa > > Secretary > > Fujitsu Limited* > > Tom > > Rutt > > TC Chair > > Fujitsu Limited* > > Robert > > Freund > > Voting Member > > Hitachi > > Nobuyuki > > Yamamoto > > Voting Member > > Hitachi > > Alan > > Weissberger > > Voting Member > > NEC Corporation* > > Paul > > Knight > > Voting Member > > Nortel > > Mark > > Peel > > Secretary > > Novell > > James > > Clark > > OASIS Staff Contact > > OASIS * > > Sumit > > Gupta > > Member - Probation > > Oracle > > Anish > > Karmarkar > > Voting Member > > Oracle > > jeff > > mischkinsky > > Voting Member > > Oracle > > Doug > > Bunting > > Secretary > > Sun * > > Hans > > Granqvist > > Voting Member > > VeriSign * > > > > > > Meeting is quorate. > > > > 3 Minutes Discussion > > > > Tom Rutt will take minutes. > > > > 3.1 Approval of previous meeting minutes > > The minutes of the 4/28 New Orleans F2F meeting are posted at: > > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/12633/ > MinutesWSRMf2f0405.htm > > > > Alan Moved to approve the 4/28 minutes, Bob seconded. > > > > No opposition minutes 4/28 minutes are approved > > > > > > 4 Status of Action Items > > 4.1 Action 121404-2 (Anish) Open > > Action: Oracle will provide examples of soap header dumps with both > ws-reliability and ws-Security headers in use, as in the interop demo. > > Anish posted email: > > WSS and WS-Reliability header dumps Anish Karmarkar 24 Feb 2005 > 23:22:27 > > Anish may post some additional examples of other combinations. Leave > open > > Sumit stated that the already sent in one example. > > 4.2 Action 012505-1 (Tom Rutt) Pending > > Action: Tom will investigate how to change the status of printed > document. The posted standard still states CD. > > Continuing action, sent newest version to OASIS Staff with Errata to > post > > 4.3 Action 020805-2 (Tom Rutt) open > > Action: Tom will investigate how to post the three OASIS pas documents > on our server. > > Jamie Clark is investigating how to get the documents on the OASIS > Site. > > > > 4.4 Action 042805-1 (Jacques Durand) Pending > > Action: Jacques will post a new version of the composability > analysis, to reflect discussions at the F2F meeting. > > Leave open. > > 5 Status of WS-Reliability Specification > > > > The public and member web site pages for the TC to have a single > announcement, which refers by URL to spec and schema at the proper > location on the OASIS web site. > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrm/2004/06/WS-Reliability-CD1.086.pdf > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrm/2004/06/fnp-1.1.xsd > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrm/2004/06/reference-1.1.xsd > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrm/2004/06/ws-reliability-1.1.xsd > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrm/2004/06/wsrmfp-1.1.xsd > > > > The spec at the above link itself still shows status a CD. > > > > Tom posted a version with edited cover page with proper ID and status > at: > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/12516/ > wsrm-ws_reliability-1.1-spec-os.pdf > > > > We now await OASIS Staff to post it at the appropriate location. > > 6 Interop SC Future activities > > Discussion of Future activities for Interop SC. > > > > Jacques: Only one commitment from NEC for the new security interop > test round. They would like to have three participants before the > interop. > > > > They are not sure how much publicity for two participants. > > > > Waiting for new participants for at least informal testing. > > > > Contact Jaques if interested. > > 7 Next Step Documentation > > Comments have been requested on the following three draft documents. > > 7.1 Editorial Clarifications and Errata > > Clarifications, editorial nits, interpretations of the actual > specification, > > The following document was voted as CD at the F2F meeting and was > posted at: > > > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/12518/ > wsrm-ws_reliability-v1.1-errata-cd1.0.pdf > > > > This is awaiting to be posted at the proper location by the OASIS > Staff. > > 7.2 Implementation Guidelines / Application Notes > > Things to help implementers, which, would typically be specific to > application environments. The following document was posted as > working draft, reflecting the discussion at the Face To Face. > > > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/12466/ > Implementation%20Guidelines%20.htm > > > > Any member can submit comments to open discussion. > > 7.3 Future Enhancement Requests > > Proposed changes for future versions which would ease implementation > or enhance protocol capabilities. The following document was posted, > reflecting the discussion at the Face to Face. > > > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/12436/ > wsReliabityFutureFeatures.htm > > > > Add comments if interested in putting more things on it. > > > > Doug: high level question – I am not sure how we should address > liaison with TC which does not exist. > > > > Lets discuss later. > > 8 Composability with other WS-Specs > > > > WS-Security Composition paper from Fujitsu, Hitachi and NEC: > > WS-Reliabilty And WS-Security - First Draft > > > > The latest version of composability aspects is posted as: > > Composability Analysis (V0.5) > > > > Jacques has an action item to post a version reflecting the f2f > discussion. > > 9 WS-reliability PAS progression > > > > OASIS Staff has not given us status regarding our request to pursue > PAS progression of WS-Reliability 1.1. > > > > 10 Liaison with WS-RX TC > > The following test was extracted from the f2f minutes: > > Bob: our TC requirements could serve as a basis for an analysis of how > the following two xmlsoap.org ws-reliable messaging specs (2/5) > relates to these requirements. > > > > Web Services Reliable Messaging Protocol (WS-ReliableMessaging). > February 2005. > > > > Web Services Reliable Messaging Policy Assertion (WS-RM Policy). > February 2005 > > > > Tom: TC members should provide contributions a gap analysis between > our TC requirements and the above reference specs. > > > > Contributions are solicited from TC members for discussion at the May > 17 Teleconf on how the specs referenced above meet (or do not meet) > our requirements. > > > > Contributions should focus on uses cases that one can or can not > accomplish with each specification. > > > > > > The call for participation for WS-RX TC is posted as: > > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-announce/200505/msg00004.html > > > > The WS-Reliability Requirements are posted at: > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/3389/ > WS-Reliability_Requirements-2003-09-05a.pdf > > > > Doug: I am not sure how we can avoid discussions of documents which > have not been submitted to this tc, with respect to a TC which does > not yet exist. > > > > Tom: One simple thing we can do is let them be aware of our > requirements. > > > > Doug: This TC at this point cannot really discuss the things that are > their input contributions. > > > > Jeff: There are limitations on IP with which we submit I'm not sure I can recall my exact words, but i'm sure the above does not capture what i said (what does the above stmnt mean?). It was something along the lines that IPR limitations are relevant for final specifications that a TC adopts. The TC, if it so chooses, can certainly "discuss" publicly available documents and formulate opinions/comments on them. cheers, jeff > > > > Doug: I am only concerned about us making comment on their inputs. > Members could submit any recommendations. > > > > Tom: I want to suggest this TC to send our requirements to them, to > facilitate migration from our spec to theirs. > > > > Jamie: Is their a TC strategy regarding migration strategy. > > > > Jamie: any TC may make suggestions to any other TC. If there are APR > restriction tell them. Requirements may not have this problem. The > TC can instruct its chair to do so, or a member could do so, if they > are a member of the new TC. > > > > Alan: I was told that the requirements doc alone would not be enough. > It should be more than a simple transfer of requirements. > > > > Tom: It might be better to have detailed comments on their spec be put > into their TC. > > > > Jamie: If you want to have them use things it must go through their > own tc. > > > > Bob: there is at least one member who would like to know how our > requirements stack up with what they are doing. We also know that our > requirements will not be dealt with in their committee. Our TC could > do a gap analysis, but members of the other TC could make the > recommendations. > > > > Tom: should our TC conduct a gap analysis against their spec. > > > > Jeff: there is a lot of confusion about IPR. One is copyright, the > other is implementation licenses. > > > > Bob: several steps. First, is it important to do gap analysis. One > we have that decision, if it is yes (trying to inform members of our > TC about difference with their input), does that gap analysis have > enough to influence the new TC committee work. > > > > Bob: this TC could send it over the fence, but experience admits that > it hardly ever works. > > TC members themselves need to bring these gaps into the new tc. > > > > Tom: should we put this on our agenda for next meeting > > > > Bob: first decide if members care. > > > > TOM is there any objections to our committee doing a gap analysis. > None. > > > > Tom: I will put gap analysis in agenda for next meeting. Submit any > contributions for that meeting. We should get commitment from > members for the contents of the gap analysis. > > > > Anish: I am interested in working on this. > > > > Bob: it would be better to have a task force to drive this. > > > > Jacques: I am interested in being on a task force. > > > > Alan: I am interested. > > > > Action: Anish, Jacques, Alan, and Iwasa will work on a document for > consideration at our next meeting. > > > > 11 Discussion of Future Meetings > > > > Tom has posted biweekly meetings, starting May 17, from 5:30 – 6:30 PM. > > > > Bob: let f2f slide and look for future opportunities. > > > > > > Jeff: The better gap analysis might be the differences in the specs > themselves. > > > > Jamie: presence of PAS Items in our doc registry Generic in calendar > docs. In WSRM. > > > > Action item closed. > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in > OASIS > at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php -- Jeff Mischkinsky jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com Director, Web Services Standards +1(650)506-1975 Consulting Member Technical Staff 500 Oracle Parkway, M/S 4OP9 Oracle Redwood Shores, CA 94065
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]