Phill,
My $0.02:
>Versioning
>
>...
>
>Version 2.x client attempts to access version 1.y service
> Desired behavior MAY be referal to 2.0 service,
> MAY be advice to downgrade request,
> MAY be 1.y response [Group MUST choose NOW]
I vote for 1.y response with minor status notification that the response is
back-level
(This is easy to build in to 1.y service -- just compare request level to
service current
level and if req-level > serv-level then issue minor status with normal
response). Tradeoff
is that if 2.0 service schema is missing elements required in 1.y request,
you'll get an
error response rather than a referral or request to downgrade. But I think
this choice provides
maximum decoupling of client behavior from server behavior while preserving
simplicity of
implementation.
>
>Version 1.y client attempts to access version 2.x service
> Desired behavior MAY be referal to 2.0 service,
> MAY be advice to downgrade request,
> MAY be 1.y response [2.x group SHOULD choose IN FUTURE]
I think this statement is wrong. I would have expected:
Version 1.y client attempts to access version 2.x service
Desired behavior MAY be referal to ***1.y*** service,
MAY be advice to **up**grade request,
MAY be 1.y response [2.x group SHOULD choose IN FUTURE]
If I'm not right about this, could you provide more explanation of the
first
two options? If I am right, I think the right behavior is a 1.y response,
on
the grounds that a reasonable service upgrade provides backward
compatibility.
>Client capability negotiation
>
>Client requests attributes from service
> Client supports attribute schemas P,Q,R
> Server supports attribute schemas Q,R,S
>
> Desired behavior
> Server responds with schema Q or R.
AND explicitly notifies client whether Q or R was used (unless this can be
determined
from elements of the schema itself --- I haven't paid enough attention to
know if this
is the case)
--bob
Bob Blakley (email: phone: +1 512 436 1564)
Chief Scientist, Security, Tivoli Systems, Inc.
"Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <> on 08/14/2001 12:30:18 PM
Please respond to "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <>
To: "Security-Services (E-mail)" <>
cc:
Subject: Version upgrade etc. use cases
