[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [wsrp-wsia] [I#174] The Consumer SHOULD NOT assert a role for arole which the Producer does not have
I agree with the alternative statement in that it asserts a stronger statement. As to roles being/not being in the spec, shouldn't you be adding an issue sometime soon? (says the keeper of the issues list :->) Gil -----Original Message----- From: Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tue, December 10, 2002 15:04 To: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [wsrp-wsia] [I#174] The Consumer SHOULD NOT assert a role for a role which th e Producer does not have The alternative suggestion is the intent currently (at least for me ...), I think it is important to not weaken the statement about what roles a Consumer is allowed to send (i.e. must be one the Producer supplied in its service description) so that it is likely meaningful to the Producer. This does not imply a requirement that the Consumer check that the role is still supported at the point of usage. All this discussion is contingent on roles remaining in the protocol of course. I still haven't seen convincing arguments that WSRP should be defining how access control is passed to a web service (yes, roles are about entities using access control when generating their markup). Rich Thompson Gil Tayar <Gil.Tayar@webcol To: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org lage.com> cc: Subject: [wsrp-wsia] [I#174] The Consumer SHOULD NOT assert a role for a role 12/10/2002 03:18 which th e Producer does not have AM Issue: 174 Status: Active Topic: interface Class: Minor_Technical Raised by: Eilon Reshef Title: The Consumer SHOULD NOT assert a role for a role which the Producer does not have Date Added: 10-Dec-2002 Document Section: v0.85/4.1.6 Description: "The Consumer ""MUST NOT"" assert a role for which no RoleDescription was part of the Producer's ServiceDescription. This should be a ""SHOULD NOT"" because changes to the service description can happen arbitrarily and we can't require Consumers to validate that the service description hasn't changed before each operation invocation. alternative would be to add verbiage to the effect that the Consumer MUST NOT assert a role the Producer has not said it supports. The Producer SHOULD be prepared to receive a role it does not currently support as it may have existed in a previous service description. The Consumer is not required to get a current snapshot all the time, but must abide by the snapshot it has." ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC