OASIS Open Mailing List Archives  ·  All Lists  ·  kmip-interop-tech  ·  2010-05

kmip-interop-tech — archive

[Date Prev]  |  [Thread Prev]  |  [Thread Next]  |  [Date Next]   —  [Date Index]  |  [Thread Index]  |  [Month Index]  |  [List Home]

Notes from KMIP interop call, May 4



All,

Here are my summary notes from today's interop call. Please let me know of any additions/corrections you might have.

Regards,
Mathias


Attending: Mathias, Bruce, Krishna (IBM), John, Stan (HP), Shyam (EMC)

Implementation Updates:

- IBM server updated after tests with Tim Hudson
- HP server no updates
- EMC client no updates, still working on making the server available (client has been run from outside corporate firewall)

Interop Information Sharing
- Sharing the information within the group participating in the interop ok, but concerns regarding sharing the information with the general public (including the general KMIP list, which is public)
- So far the sharing about the details have been between the involved parties, although the whole group is aware of roughly what the others support/don't support

New Use Cases
- Not much feedback from Mathias' skeleton use case document from a few months ago, targeted at symmetric key profiles
- Stan and Indra have been looking at use case(s) regarding key wrapping
- Could use more use cases
- New use cases would not be included in v1.0 document
- Aim at revisiting the topic later when Tim is able to join the call

Timing of Calls
- Proposal from Tim Hudson to reschedule interop call to the same day as the general KMIP TC call, either before or after
- Some other possible alternatives also suggested, Mathias to send out an email polling people's preferences and availability

Other
- Related to earlier open-source and API discussion: there has been talk of making a reference implementation available (with no standardized API), but here an open issue is the hosting of the implementation, the license and the accepting of contributions, in addition to other legal issues
- Change to the latest version of the spec has introduced ambiguity in the Get Usage Allocation operation: the client does not indicate if it wants bytes or objects; also, the reference in the Usage Limit Count field suggests the type of this field might be a structure
- Use Cases document interprets the field to be of type long integer
- Bruce to send a note to the TC list

[Date Prev]  |  [Thread Prev]  |  [Thread Next]  |  [Date Next]   —  [Date Index]  |  [Thread Index]  |  [Month Index]  |  [List Home]