RE: [ebxml-msg] Updated Security Section Draft

Title: Updated Security Section Draft

We need to remind early on (before Section
12 on Conformance) that alternatives such as WSS1.0 / WSS 1.1 (and the
interoperability issues these may cause) is supposed to be dealt with at
conformance profile level - defined in a companion doc ("ebMS3 adjuncts").

- We could remind this every time such an
alternative occurs (WSS 1.*, SOAP 1.*, WS-Rel*)

- or we could do it early on in 1.3
(caveat and assumptions) with adding:

 

"This specification presents some
alternatives regarding underlying specifications (e.g. SOAP 1.1/1.2,
WSS1.0/1.1, and WS specifications that may support the reliability function). This
does not imply that a conforming implementation has to support them all, nor
that it is free to support any option. The definition of conformance profiles -
out of scope for this document, and to be described in an adjunct OASIS document
-  will complement this specification by asserting which option(s) must be
supported in order to claim support for a particular conformance profile. Interoperability
is conditioned by conformance to compatible profiles. See section 12
(Conformance) for more details."

 

 

Jacques

 

From: Ric Emery
[mailto:] 

Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 1:08
PM

To: 

Subject: [ebxml-msg] Updated
Security Section Draft

 

 

Here is a draft of the updated Security Section. 
I took the bullet list from the last draft and blew it out into what I would
consider a more useful form. The prose could use some work, but I think I have
covered all the high points.