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: Prelim minutes of 2/21 teleconf

Prelim minutes are attached.

Please post corrections to list before next monday.

Tom Rutt

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

Title: Full Agenda for WSRM TC Conference Call –June 14, 2005

Prelim minutes WSRM TC Conference Call –Feb 21, 2006


The meeting of the WSRM  TC took  place by teleconference 

Time         Tuesday, 21 Feb 2006, 05:30pm to 06:30pm ET

1          Draft Agenda:

1) review agenda

2) Roll Call

3) Minutes approval

4) Action Items

5) Discussion of potential TC future activities

5.1 Reliability of Response

5.2 Delivery Assertions for Sequences

6) New Business

2          Roll Call


First Name

Last Name





Voting Member

Oracle Corporation*



Voting Member

Oracle Corporation*



Voting Member

Nortel Networks Limited*



Voting Member

Hitachi, Ltd.*



Voting Member

Hitachi, Ltd.*



Voting Member

Hitachi, Ltd.*




Fujitsu Limited*




Fujitsu Limited*




Fujitsu Limited*



Meeting is quorate


3          Minutes Discussion


Tom Rutt Volunteered to take minutes.


3.1       Approval of previous meeting minutes


The minutes of the 1/24 teleconference meeting are posted at:




Bob moved to approve the 1/24  minutes, Jacques  seconded.


No opposition minutes 1/24  minutes are approved


4          Status of Action Items

4.1       Action 012505-1 (Tom Rutt) Closed

OASIS Staff has posted the errata cd as:


The posted standard the errata index is referenced as as:



The errata Index now exists.


The action is closed.

1          Discussion of Potential Future TC activites

The working list of potential enhancements to WS-Reliability was posted after the last f2f as:




TC needs to decide among the following possibilities

  1. work to resolve new issues raised within charter of TC,
  2. put the tc into maintenance mode (i.e., two meetings a year awaiting usage issues),
  3. schedule vote to disband TC


Just before the last meeting Fujitsu posted the following proposal:



Jacques gave a review of what he proposes.  Fujitsu has interest in investigating how two implementations could interoperate.  This might extend the charter


Within ws-reliability is the question of reliability of synchronous response.   This seems to be pushed into implementation aspect.  WSRX implementers have realiazed that hter is a gap.  This needs to be handled.  Fujitsu has users of ws-reliability in Japan, and has an interest in working on an updated to ws-reliability to handle synchronous response.


The other issue  is the assertion of Delivery assurance.  Do we want to have a new way to handle reliability contract.  We have wsdl features and properties in our spec.


How much demand is there for requirements in this area.


A separate realization of reliability contracts could be investigated.


Tom:  I would like to investigate an interworking unit from WS-reliability to WS-Reliabile messaging.  It would include mappings of DA from one spec to another.  I would also like our group to work on interworking units between the two protocols.


Jacques: Fujitsu would also like this to be accomplished.  This might require the charter to be changed. Investigation is needed.


Action: Tom will post a contribution on interworking ws-reliablity with ws rm.




1.1       Reliable Request Response

Jacques posted the following contribution

Groups - Reliability of Request-Responses (Reliable-Req-Resp-contribution.doc) uploaded



Jacques: If we can express the contract of the response we can handle this requirement.  It is a modest expansion to what is there.


Action: Jacques will clarify what he thinks we should do to provide reliability on the response.

1.2       Delivery Assertions for Sequences

Tom: we might want to explore an extension of ws-rm to pass the da negotiation from ws-reliabilty.

Jacques; users might be surprised that there is not a standard representation of DA in ws rm.  We need to hear from users regarding their requirements.


Tom: how many people are using da negotiation in ws reliability.


Iwasa: in Japan users are implementing WS-reliability


Tom: how do we find out what DA levels are being used for ws-reliabiltiy


Action: Iwasa will try to find out what da levels are being use for ws reiliialbiy.

2          Future Meetings

At last meeting, TC agreed to decide on the next meeting at this meeting. 


Agree to have next teleconf on April 04 2006.


Bob f moved to adjourn, Jeff M seconded.



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