IRC log of ws-addr on 2007-03-19

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:53:48 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ws-addr
19:53:49 [RRSAgent]
logging to
19:54:05 [bob]
zakim, this will be ws_addrwg
19:54:05 [Zakim]
ok, bob; I see WS_AddrWG()4:00PM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
19:54:35 [bob]
meeting: Web Services Addressing WG Teleconference
19:54:50 [bob]
rrsagent, make logs public
19:55:01 [bob]
chair: Bob Freund
19:56:32 [bob]
19:57:49 [Zakim]
WS_AddrWG()4:00PM has now started
19:57:56 [Zakim]
19:58:04 [gpilz]
gpilz has joined #ws-addr
19:58:32 [Zakim]
20:00:45 [Rama]
Rama has joined #ws-addr
20:00:49 [Zakim]
20:01:29 [monica]
monica has joined #ws-addr
20:02:04 [Zakim]
20:02:15 [MrGoodner]
MrGoodner has joined #ws-addr
20:02:20 [Zakim]
20:02:25 [Zakim]
20:02:27 [anish]
anish has joined #ws-addr
20:02:37 [bob]
zakim ??P7 is MrGoodner
20:02:42 [TonyR]
TonyR has joined #ws-addr
20:03:36 [TomR]
TomR has joined #ws-addr
20:03:50 [monica]
Monica Martin, Sun
20:04:20 [Zakim]
20:04:38 [yinleng]
yinleng has joined #ws-addr
20:05:40 [Zakim]
20:05:59 [yinleng]
zakim, ??P10 is me
20:05:59 [Zakim]
+yinleng; got it
20:06:05 [bob]
zakim ??P10 is yinleng
20:06:40 [Zakim]
20:07:00 [Zakim]
20:07:15 [Zakim]
20:07:29 [PaulKnight]
PaulKnight has joined #ws-addr
20:07:50 [bob]
zakim, [Microsoft] is ram
20:07:50 [Zakim]
+ram; got it
20:09:09 [bob]
scribe: TomR
20:09:24 [TomR]
Topic: Agenda
20:09:29 [Ram]
Ram has joined #ws-addr
20:09:55 [TomR]
Resolution: New issue concerning version of policy namespace accepted
20:10:14 [TomR]
Topic: Minutes from last meeting
20:10:24 [TomR]
Resolution: Minutes of last meeting accepted
20:10:32 [Paco]
Paco has joined #ws-addr
20:10:35 [TomR]
Topic: LC2 Issue 1 ws policy comments
20:10:55 [TomR]
Proposals for E, with New proposal F.
20:11:44 [TomR]
Proposal E: Parameters
20:12:08 [TomR]
Proposal F: This new alternative F takes the approach of nested support
20:12:08 [TomR]
> assertions, however
20:12:08 [TomR]
> non presence of a nested policy assertion now implies that the
20:12:08 [TomR]
> associated response mode is not supported.
20:13:41 [bob]
20:14:00 [gpilz]
20:15:18 [Zakim]
20:15:34 [Zakim]
20:16:15 [bob]
ack gpil
20:16:44 [anish]
q+ to ask about composibility with rm assertion
20:17:11 [TomR]
Gil: my concern is with nonAnonymous assertion. Non presense of non anonmous means non anymous supported. Due to wide open definition of non anonymous
20:18:57 [dhull]
dhull has joined #ws-addr
20:20:00 [bob]
ack anish
20:20:00 [Zakim]
anish, you wanted to ask about composibility with rm assertion
20:20:25 [TomR]
The policy expression can compose with ws make connection, by also asserting nonAnonymous support
20:23:44 [TomR]
Anish: rm is optional, use anon back channel. Need two alternatives, anon another non anon as well as rm
20:24:14 [TomR]
We can do examples for all of these cases.
20:25:42 [TomR]
Composition with RX should be shown to everyone's happyness.
20:29:53 [TomR]
Gil: Reply to anon, fault to is non anonymous. These assertions cover responses as a Bob: can we enumerate use cases for an email discussion.
20:30:01 [MrGoodner]
20:30:13 [MrGoodner]
20:30:24 [bob]
ack mrg
20:34:01 [TomR]
Marc G: we have been talking about another alternative with nested assertions, (alternative G). This mail is differnent says addressing without nested policy says only ws addressing is supported. It retains required language, but they cannot be used on same alternative.
20:34:16 [TomR]
Tom what is difference between new G and the old alternative A.
20:34:27 [TomR]
Bob: I did not see your mail Marc.
20:36:10 [gpilz]
20:36:32 [bob]
ack gpil
20:36:34 [Zakim]
20:36:38 [TomR]
General agreement on use of nested policy.
20:36:43 [TonyR]
zakim, ??p0 is me
20:36:43 [Zakim]
+TonyR; got it
20:36:44 [MrGoodner]
20:37:09 [TomR]
Gil Client can look at parameters to determine if it can interact with a server
20:37:14 [Zakim]
20:37:19 [monica]
Need to also ensure we understand how this is handled in the default intersection algorithm. Consider how such assumptions may have an influence with other composable specifications. Particularly if you wish to leverage was is defined in WS-Policy.
20:37:23 [TomR]
Paco: I agree with that.
20:37:33 [monica]
20:37:41 [Zakim]
20:37:44 [MrGoodner]
20:38:45 [MrGoodner]
20:39:04 [bob]
ack mrg
20:39:24 [TomR]
Tom: we need to understand the requirements before we can decide on parameters of nested policy assertions.
20:39:37 [anish]
i don't understand the schema ns issue. i.e., why is it an issue
20:39:47 [TomR]
Marc G: we worked on this new proposal G, since we find value in doing the intersection matching.
20:40:04 [gpilz]
anish - because then we have to argue about what version of WS-Policy we reference
20:40:21 [plh]
plh has joined #ws-addr
20:40:23 [gpilz]
s/we have to/we are likely to/
20:40:25 [Zakim]
20:40:38 [gpilz]
20:40:48 [gpilz]
20:41:22 [MrGoodner]
20:42:10 [TomR]
Gil: if we used nested parameters we wuld not need the wsp namespace in our schema.
20:42:38 [TomR]
Anish: this metadata spec in w3c has w3c restrictions. anyway.
20:42:38 [bob]
ack mrg
20:43:15 [TomR]
Marc G: I agree with anish. and the fix to the new issue is to change to CR reference.
20:44:22 [TomR]
Bob: can we agree that alternative e is unacceptable, since intersection mechanism.
20:44:29 [TomR]
No objection:
20:44:49 [TomR]
Bob: can Marc explain the differences.
20:45:57 [TomR]
Marc : G stays with requirements semantics. F has empty addressing meaing no responses, G empty means addressing is fully supported. for mixed mode F has both, for G use unqualivied addressing assertion.
20:46:39 [TomR]
Marc G: both compose with make connectib
20:46:53 [TomR]
Tony: what about no responses.
20:47:45 [TomR]
Marc G: G does not allow saying no responses. But non is allowed in both
20:47:59 [bob]
20:48:50 [TomR]
Tom: how important is use case for no responses supported.
20:49:05 [TomR]
Bob: is more time required.
20:49:25 [TomR]
general agreement to discuss both over email.
20:50:13 [TomR]
Bob: Is one week ok for next meeting?
20:50:48 [Zakim]
20:51:03 [TomR]
Bob: April 2 for next meeting
20:51:10 [TomR]
Agreed, next meeting April 2.
20:51:23 [plh]
regrets for next meeting
20:52:15 [TomR]
Topic: New issue on namespace
20:52:27 [TomR]
Marc: it is a simple bug fix.
20:53:29 [TomR]
Bob: does everyone agree to resolve by plugging in the new namespace from CR version of WS Policy.
20:53:53 [TomR]
Resolution: New issue resolved by fixing to CR version of WS Policy.
20:54:28 [TomR]
Agreed to have use case discussion for proposals F or G on email.
20:54:44 [monica]
20:56:23 [TomR]
Bob: Policy interop in May in Ottawa. IBM can test metadata interop but we need at least one other company.
20:57:03 [Zakim]
20:57:05 [TomR]
Bob: Other companies should come forward, so we can meet our interop requirement of 2.
20:57:27 [Zakim]
20:57:30 [Zakim]
20:57:31 [Zakim]
20:57:32 [Zakim]
20:57:33 [Zakim]
20:57:34 [Zakim]
20:57:36 [Zakim]
20:57:37 [Zakim]
20:57:38 [Zakim]
20:57:39 [Zakim]
20:57:40 [yinleng]
yinleng has left #ws-addr
20:57:41 [TomR]
TomR has left #ws-addr
20:57:41 [Zakim]
20:57:48 [bob]
rrsagent, generate minutes
20:57:48 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate bob
20:57:57 [TonyR]
TonyR has left #ws-addr
20:58:02 [Zakim]
20:58:11 [Zakim]
20:58:44 [Katy]
Katy has joined #ws-addr
21:00:04 [David_Illsley]
David_Illsley has joined #ws-addr
21:00:33 [Zakim]
21:05:33 [David_Illsley]
zakim, who is here?
21:05:34 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Paul_Knight, [IPcaller], David_Illsley
21:05:38 [Zakim]
On IRC I see David_Illsley, Katy, plh, dhull, Ram, MrGoodner, Rama, RRSAgent, Zakim, bob
21:06:24 [bob]
david, sorry about our summertime switch
21:06:42 [Zakim]
21:07:44 [David_Illsley]
so it's all over?
21:07:54 [bob]
yes, we wrapped up.
21:07:58 [David_Illsley]
21:08:12 [David_Illsley]
when's the next call?
21:08:15 [bob]
Next week decide between alternative F and G
21:08:21 [bob]
Next call is April 2
21:08:31 [bob]
21:08:34 [Katy]
so now I can go and watch tele!
21:08:38 [David_Illsley]
ok, thanks, speak to you then
21:08:39 [Katy]
21:08:42 [Zakim]
21:08:44 [bob]
sure, what's on?
21:08:53 [Katy]
I'll take a look - not sure
21:08:54 [David_Illsley]
David_Illsley has left #ws-addr
21:08:58 [Katy]
sorry we missed the call
21:09:00 [bob]
noting good here
21:09:06 [bob]
21:09:26 [Katy]
bye for now - we are back to summertime next week
21:09:29 [Katy]
21:09:33 [bob]
21:09:48 [bob]
bob has left #ws-addr
21:10:32 [Zakim]
21:10:33 [Zakim]
WS_AddrWG()4:00PM has ended
21:10:34 [Zakim]
Attendees were Gilbert_Pilz, Bob_Freund, Mark_Little, Tom_Rutt, m2, Anish_Karmarkar, yinleng, Paco:Francisco_Curbera, Paul_Knight, ram, David_Hull, TonyR, Plh, [IPcaller],
21:10:36 [Zakim]
... David_Illsley
21:13:09 [Rama]
Rama has left #ws-addr