Re: [wss] ISSUE 190: text for SOAP MustUnderstand issue

[Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>]

Rich,

I think that you DO need the language I proposed to define what it means 
to 
"understand" a wsse:Security header block. Without it, there will be 
rampant confusion.
I certainly concur with your suggestion that lines 162-3 be added to Goals 
section.

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris
STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
phone: +1 508 234 3624

Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com> wrote on 10/30/2003 10:46:50 AM:

> I took another look through the spec, and it seems the only place that 
> really needs "fixing" to address soap 1.1 and (vs.?)soap 1.2 issues is 
> sec 5.
> 
> I propose the following
>    Copy lines 162-163 (that say any SOAP version) into the Goals section 

> after line 121.
> 
>    Remove all mention of mustUnderstand; its semantics are defined by 
> SOAP, and we can't constrain, subclass, or further modify it (see lines 
> 455-457).
> 
>    Genericize the wording in section 5 so that it is more clearly 
> soap-version-neutral.  It looks easy to do this; I can send a draft 
> later today if there's interest.
> 
>    /r$
> 
> -- 
> Rich Salz, Chief Security Architect
> DataPower Technology                           http://www.datapower.com
> XS40 XML Security Gateway   http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
> XML Security Overview  http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html
>