IRC log of ws-ra on 2009-04-28

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:06:15 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
19:06:15 [RRSAgent]
logging to
19:06:17 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
19:06:17 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ws-ra
19:06:19 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WSRA
19:06:19 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM scheduled to start in 24 minutes
19:06:20 [trackbot]
Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
19:06:20 [trackbot]
Date: 28 April 2009
19:21:01 [fmaciel]
fmaciel has joined #ws-ra
19:23:42 [Geoff]
Geoff has joined #ws-ra
19:25:14 [Bob]
Bob has joined #ws-ra
19:26:03 [Bob]
trackbot, start conference
19:26:05 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
19:26:07 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be WSRA
19:26:07 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WS_WSRA()3:30PM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
19:26:08 [trackbot]
Meeting: Web Services Resource Access Working Group Teleconference
19:26:08 [trackbot]
Date: 28 April 2009
19:28:34 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()3:30PM has now started
19:28:41 [Zakim]
19:28:43 [Zakim]
19:28:50 [TRutt]
TRutt has joined #ws-ra
19:28:52 [dug]
dug has joined #ws-ra
19:29:00 [Zakim]
19:29:05 [Zakim]
19:29:28 [Zakim]
19:29:58 [Zakim]
+ +0125660aaaa
19:30:02 [Zakim]
19:30:08 [Bob]
19:30:31 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #ws-ra
19:30:34 [dug]
19:30:37 [Katy]
Katy has joined #ws-ra
19:31:04 [asir]
asir has joined #ws-ra
19:31:16 [Zakim]
19:31:24 [Zakim]
19:31:34 [Wu]
Wu has joined #ws-ra
19:31:37 [Bob]
agenda: Distributed meeting
19:31:38 [Bob]
Time: 15:30-17:00 EDT
19:31:40 [Bob]
Dial-in and IRC according to usual practice[5]
19:31:41 [Bob]
Topic: Opening
19:31:43 [Bob]
19:31:44 [Bob]
Selection of scribe, see scribe list[1]
19:31:46 [Bob]
Approval of this Agenda
19:31:47 [Bob]
Approval of minutes from the 2009-04-21 distributed meeting[2]
19:31:49 [Bob]
Note that "*" preceding an issue is chair's suggestion of priority discussion
19:31:51 [Bob]
"#" ought to be quickly closable (But the chair is often surprised)
19:31:52 [Bob]
Items marked "X" in the chair's opinion need seasoning
19:31:54 [Bob]
Topic: New Issues
19:31:55 [Bob]
19:31:57 [Bob]
Topic: Task Team Progress
19:31:58 [Bob]
-Team 6413
19:32:00 [Bob]
Topic: Issues with proposals
19:32:01 [Bob]
19:32:03 [Bob]
*-Issue-6787 All: Fix use of ... as element extensibility -Davis
19:32:04 [Bob]
19:32:07 [Bob]
#-Issue-6403 Enumeration - define policy -Davis
19:32:08 [Bob]
19:32:10 [Bob]
*-Issue-6401 WS-Eventing Notifications violates WS-I BP -Davis -Pilz
19:32:13 [Bob]
*-Issue-6692 WS-Eventing: Remove Mode from the specification -Snelling
19:32:16 [Bob]
*-Issue-6696 Eventing: When to check the EPRs -Davis
19:32:19 [Bob]
*-Issue-6724 Eventing: define resource representation -Davis
19:32:20 [Zakim]
19:32:21 [Bob]
#-Issue-6788 Eventing: 'Notification' defn isn't quite right -Davis
19:32:23 [Bob]
19:32:25 [Bob]
-Issue-6500 MEX: Wrappers around GetMetadata -Bullen (6398)
19:32:27 [Bob]
19:32:30 [Bob]
*-Issue-6712 Transfer: Create is ambiguous -Davis
19:32:32 [Bob]
19:32:33 [Bob]
-Issue-6699 RT: ability to assign metadata during create -Davis
19:32:36 [Bob]
19:32:38 [Bob]
Topic: Issues for general discussion
19:32:40 [Bob]
19:32:42 [Bob]
#*-Issue-6694 All: Which specifications have implicit operations? -Davis
19:32:46 [Bob]
19:32:47 [Bob]
-Issue-6422 RT - Introduces An Ad Hoc Boxcarring Mechanism -Bullen
19:32:50 [Bob]
-Issue-6575 RT - Fragment Put should allow computed values -Bullen
19:32:53 [Bob]
-Issue-6634 RT - Document algorithm for modify -Bullen
19:32:55 [Bob]
-Issue-6635 RT - Outer resource with individually addressable inner resources -Bullen
19:32:58 [Bob]
-Issue-6636 RT - Add example of resource after the create -Bullen
19:33:01 [Bob]
19:33:04 [Bob]
-Issue-6435 WS-Eventing needs state table to fully describe protocol -Pilz
19:33:07 [Bob]
-Issue-6642 WS-Eventing does not describe how to advertise policy for Subscription Manager -Pilz
19:33:09 [Bob]
19:33:11 [Bob]
-Issue-6406 WS-MEX - define policy -Davis
19:33:13 [Bob]
-Issue-6463 MEX-Attaching Policy to WS-Mex GetMetadata -Warr
19:33:16 [Bob]
-Issue-6674 MEX should reference latest W3C REC versions of WS-Policy and WS-PolilcyAttachment -Pilz
19:33:18 [Bob]
-Issue-6679 MEX's stance towards metadata scope and semantics needs clarification -Pilz
19:33:21 [Bob]
-Issue-6680 MEX Section 3.2 has inconsistent properties -Pilz
19:33:25 [Bob]
19:33:27 [Bob]
-Issue-6436 WS-Enumeration needs state table to fully describe protocol -Pilz
19:33:30 [Bob]
19:33:31 [Bob]
19:33:33 [Bob]
19:33:35 [Bob]
19:33:37 [Bob]
Issues needing owners
19:33:40 [Bob]
-Issue-6701 Enumeration: Create Infoset description
19:33:41 [Bob]
-Issue-6702 MEX: Create Infoset description
19:33:43 [Bob]
-Issue-6703 RT: Create Infoset description
19:33:45 [Bob]
-Issue-6704 Transfer: Create Infoset description
19:33:47 [Bob]
Needing Proposals prior to Discussion:
19:33:49 [Bob]
19:33:51 [Bob]
-Issue-6413 Transfer- Move Fragment support from RT to Transfer -Davis -Warr (Task Team Warr Bullen)
19:33:54 [Bob]
-Issue-6533 Transfer: Safeness of operations -Lafon (Action-45)
19:33:57 [Bob]
-Issue-6551 RT - Message processing time exceeded -Bullen (Action-13)
19:34:00 [Bob]
-Issue-6632 RT - Define fault for cases where the GetResult is too large -Bullen (Action-32)
19:34:03 [Bob]
-Issue-6633 RT - Namespaces in updates -Bullen (Action-32)
19:34:05 [Bob]
-Issue-6691 WS-T/RT - Reconcile faults -Warr (Action-51)
19:34:08 [Bob]
-Issue-6594 Transfer: Add extensibility points for WS-Transfer wrappers -Davis -Bullen (Action-57)
19:34:10 [Bob]
-Issue-6672 Transfer: Non deterministic behavior of PutResponse -Davis -Bullen (Action-57)
19:34:13 [Bob]
-Issue-6673 Transfer: Non deterministic behavior of Create -Davis -Bullen (Action-57)
19:34:16 [Bob]
19:34:18 [Zakim]
19:34:18 [Bob]
-Issue-6407 WS-RT - define policy -Davis (Action-25)
19:34:20 [Bob]
-Issue-6549 RT - Create focused on resource fragments -Bullen
19:34:23 [Bob]
-Issue-6550 RT - Support for XSLT and XQuery in PUT -Bullen (Action-11)
19:34:27 [Bob]
-Issue-6552 RT - Lifecycle metadata for Create -Bullen (Action-12)
19:34:29 [Bob]
-Issue-6576 RT - No Fault Defined for Mi6432smatch between ResourceTransfer header and message body -Bullen (Action-28)
19:34:32 [Bob]
-Issue-6578 RT - SideEffects applies to other faults -Bullen (Action-29)
19:34:35 [Bob]
-Issue-6579 RT - Bad fragment values with Create -Bullen (Action-30)
19:34:36 [li]
li has joined #ws-ra
19:34:39 [Bob]
-Issue-6603 RT - Inconsistencies in CreateResponse message -Bullen (Action-20)
19:34:41 [Bob]
19:34:43 [Bob]
-Issue-6402 WS-Eventing - define policy -Davis (Action-24)
19:34:46 [Bob]
-Issue-6421 Eventing-Extension point in reply message of Unsubscribe -Bullen (Action-27)
19:34:49 [Bob]
-Issue-6429 Eventing: Standardize Wrapped Event Sink -Li (Action-42)
19:34:51 [Bob]
-Issue-6700 Eventing: Complete Infoset description -Wu
19:34:53 [Bob]
19:34:56 [Bob]
-Issue-6411 WS-MEX: no way to create metadata -Davis (Action-26)
19:34:58 [Bob]
19:35:00 [Bob]
Blocked with dependancy on (issue):
19:35:02 [Bob]
19:35:04 [Bob]
X-Issue-6430 Eventing-Remove Attribute wse:EventSource -Li (6401)
19:35:07 [Bob]
X-Issue-6661 WS-Eventing Appendix I is incomplete and incorrect -Pilz (6401)
19:35:10 [Bob]
X-Issue-6432 WS-Eventing Push delivery mode does not work when the subscriber is not addressable -Pilz -Davis (6692)
19:35:13 [Bob]
X-Issue-6803 RT: Is this functionality required? -Bullen (6413)
19:35:16 [Bob]
19:35:19 [Bob]
19:35:20 [Bob]
19:35:22 [Bob]
19:35:24 [Bob]
[4] - this space for rent -
19:35:27 [Bob]
19:35:30 [Bob]
19:35:50 [Zakim]
+ +1.908.253.aabb
19:36:14 [Bob]
scribe: Ashok
19:36:19 [Vikas]
Vikas has joined #ws-ra
19:36:36 [Bob]
19:36:58 [dug]
19:37:21 [Zakim]
19:37:27 [Ashok]
Topic: Convening
19:37:57 [asir]
(Carriage Return - Line Feed) pair, and these messages SHALL NOT
19:37:57 [asir]
exceed 512 characters in length
19:38:09 [Zakim]
19:38:22 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.642.aacc
19:38:33 [Ashok]
Bob: Add 2 new issues to agenda
19:38:42 [gpilz]
gpilz has joined #ws-ra
19:38:53 [gpilz]
hai, im am here
19:39:56 [Zakim]
19:40:08 [gpilz]
it's actually a MSFT keyboard
19:40:13 [Ashok]
Topic: Approval of minutes of last mtg
19:40:13 [DaveS]
DaveS has joined #ws-ra
19:40:39 [Bob]
19:41:16 [Ashok]
Minutes from April 21 approved w/o objection
19:41:47 [Ashok]
Can we open the 2 new issues and assign to the opener, Doug!
19:41:59 [Ashok]
Topic: Issue 6413
19:42:27 [Ashok]
Katy: We have a compromise proposal. We shd be ready next week.
19:42:39 [Geoff]
19:42:57 [Ashok]
Yves: Where are the emails re. 6413
19:43:13 [Ashok]
Katy: We had a telcon
19:43:17 [dug]
Yves - it was private email
19:43:56 [Bob]
ack yves
19:44:01 [Bob]
ack geoff
19:44:08 [Ashok]
Geoff: I want to ask abt mssion of the TF
19:44:21 [dug]
19:45:02 [Ashok]
.... is it the mission to create a new spec called, say fragments and how this works with WS-T
19:45:58 [dug]
19:46:13 [Ashok]
Bob: I expect TF to come back with proposal acceptable to TF and hopefully by the rest of the WG
19:46:34 [Katy]
19:46:51 [dug]
19:46:53 [Ashok]
Geoff: Shall we solve the technical issues?
19:47:31 [Zakim]
19:47:40 [Bob]
ack dug
19:48:36 [Ashok]
Dug: We have had lots to discussion ... the TF has to come up with a compromise that is acceptable to IBMand MS and hopefully by the rest of the WG
19:48:50 [Geoff]
19:49:05 [Bob]
ack dug'
19:49:10 [Bob]
ack geoff
19:50:15 [Ashok]
Geoff: We agreed thatere wd be a spec called 'transfer' ... shouldn't that be the starting point
19:50:34 [Ashok]
s/thatere/that there/
19:50:52 [Yves]
I remember saying last time that the ideal place for fragments was... in addressing, close to EPR definition, so having a standalone spec is the best match
19:51:04 [Katy]
19:51:14 [Bob]
ack katy
19:51:30 [gpilz]
19:51:33 [asir]
19:51:44 [Ashok]
Katy: I think the key is to come up with an acceptable proposal
19:52:47 [gpilz]
19:52:53 [asir]
19:52:53 [Ashok]
Bob: Let's not talk abt this further until the TF comes back to us
19:53:00 [dug]
zakim, who is talking?
19:53:13 [Zakim]
dug, listening for 12 seconds I heard sound from the following: Bob_Freund (75%), +1.408.642.aacc (21%)
19:53:31 [Ashok]
Topic: New Issue 6787
19:53:51 [Ashok]
Dug: Strictly editorial
19:54:27 [Ashok]
... they use ... for extensibility. Shd use xs:any for extensibility
19:54:41 [dug]
and they rejoiced
19:55:01 [Ashok]
Accept Dug's proposal in bugzill to resolve 6787
19:55:12 [Ashok]
Topic: Issue 6403
19:55:27 [Ashok]
19:55:30 [Geoff]
19:55:44 [Ashok]
No changes since last week.
19:55:47 [Bob]
ack geoff
19:56:17 [Ashok]
Geoff: We have some comments. We shd create some concrete text.
19:56:24 [Ashok]
Bob: ETA?
19:56:44 [Ashok]
Geoff: Try for next week
19:57:12 [Ashok]
ACTION: Geoff to create a conterproposal for 6403 by next week
19:57:13 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-60 - Create a conterproposal for 6403 by next week [on Geoff Bullen - due 2009-05-05].
19:57:50 [Ashok]
Topic: Issue 6401
19:57:58 [Geoff]
19:58:04 [dug]
Latest proposal:
19:59:13 [Bob]
ack geoff
19:59:21 [Ashok]
Gil: Wanted to get everyone on board
19:59:53 [Ashok]
Geoff: WS-PAEPER not necessary
20:00:28 [li]
20:01:10 [Zakim]
20:01:22 [Ashok]
Ashok: Why is there a <Policy> element child of EPR
20:01:22 [Bob]
acl li
20:01:35 [Vikas]
Vikas has joined #ws-ra
20:01:58 [Ashok]
Li: Generally in agreement with Gil's approach
20:02:16 [Zakim]
20:02:20 [gpilz]
20:02:21 [asir]
I did not understand Ashok's question
20:02:32 [Bob]
ack li
20:03:32 [Ashok]
Asir, see section 7 of MEX... look at the EPR example ... why are there <Policy> and <Metedata> children for the EPR. No need for <Policy>
20:03:57 [Wu]
20:04:14 [asir]
20:04:48 [Ashok]
li: We have frienfly amendements on Gil's propsal and wd like to separate out Policy Negotiation
20:05:03 [asir]
q+ to answer Ashok's question
20:05:19 [Ashok]
20:05:31 [Bob]
ack gpi
20:05:47 [Wu]
20:05:49 [asir]
awesome Gil!
20:06:21 [Ashok]
Gil: Li, Wu and I shd discuss and prepare actual text
20:06:53 [Geoff]
20:07:36 [Ashok]
ACTION: Li and Gil to prepare text by next week
20:07:36 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-61 - And Gil to prepare text by next week [on Li Li - due 2009-05-05].
20:08:46 [Bob]
ack geoff
20:08:50 [Bob]
ack asir
20:08:50 [Zakim]
asir, you wanted to answer Ashok's question
20:09:23 [Ashok]
Geoff: If we remove <policy< element then we do not need WS-PAEPER?
20:09:27 [Wu]
20:09:29 [Ashok]
Ashok: Correct
20:09:54 [asir]
Ashok - it appears that is already taken down in the editors' draft, see
20:10:10 [Bob]
ack wu
20:10:17 [dug]
phew - I was looking and I couldn't find it
20:10:33 [asir]
Good job cleaning up Doug!
20:11:07 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #ws-ra
20:11:43 [Ashok]
Topic: Note from Noah Mendelsohn
20:12:03 [Ashok]
TAG will not raise issues on our work
20:12:09 [asir]
20:12:29 [Bob]
ack asir
20:12:49 [Ashok]
Asir thanks Bob for getting this resolved early
20:13:28 [Ashok]
Topic: Issue 6692
20:13:35 [Geoff]
20:13:42 [Wu]
20:13:51 [Ashok]
Remove 'mode' from Eventing
20:14:32 [Bob]
ack geof
20:14:35 [Zakim]
20:14:38 [Zakim]
20:15:22 [Ashok]
Wu: I would like to move on to other issues. This has been extensively discussed. Semantics of WS-Eventing may change based on other issues
20:15:38 [Ashok]
Bob: Which issues block this?
20:15:46 [Ashok]
Wu: 6432
20:15:47 [Zakim]
20:16:02 [Ashok]
Bob: I think 6432 is blocked by this one
20:16:38 [Ashok]
Wu: I think 6432 goes first
20:16:53 [gpilz]
20:17:39 [Zakim]
20:18:31 [Bob]
ack gpil
20:18:58 [Ashok]
Gil: I don't think 6432 blocks this. It's orthogonal.
20:20:41 [Ashok]
Bob: When we spoke abt 6432 last week the issue of 'mode' kep coming up. Let's pick one to solve first.
20:20:59 [Ashok]
20:21:13 [Ashok]
Wu: We are thinking of proposal for 6432
20:22:06 [gpilz]
20:22:19 [dug]
brb dog is throwing up....
20:22:40 [Ashok]
ACTION: Wu to provide new words for 6432 by May 8, 2009
20:22:40 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-62 - Provide new words for 6432 by May 8, 2009 [on wu chou - due 2009-05-05].
20:22:46 [DaveS]
20:22:50 [gpilz]
20:23:04 [Bob]
ack dave
20:23:08 [Bob]
ack wu
20:23:26 [gpilz]
20:23:27 [Ashok]
DaveS: Why don't we discuss the other one first
20:23:54 [asir]
Don't understand where we are?
20:24:04 [Ashok]
... move on 6693
20:24:08 [Geoff]
20:24:27 [Wu]
20:24:29 [gpilz]
20:24:38 [Ashok]
20:25:17 [gpilz]
20:26:00 [dug]
20:27:20 [Ashok]
DaveS: Argues why we don't need mode
20:27:28 [gpilz]
20:27:44 [asir]
I thought Bob asked Dave to describe where we are re 6692 discussion
20:28:20 [Bob]
ack geo
20:28:38 [dug]
Mode is broken and no one has refuted my points in:
20:28:38 [Ashok]
Geoff: Mode acts as selection mechanism
20:28:55 [DaveS]
20:29:23 [dug]
20:29:33 [Ashok]
... but we need to move forward. I've been thinking about a proposal
20:30:16 [TRutt]
20:30:17 [asir]
a mechanism for a subscriber to specify a delivery mode to an event source!
20:30:37 [Ashok]
... MS is absolutly for a selection concept. Client needs to be able to select the mode.
20:30:38 [Bob]
ack wu
20:31:57 [Ashok]
Wu: I propose we shd keep it in. You don't have to use it.
20:32:55 [Ashok]
Bob: How do we move forward ... need some compromise
20:33:01 [Geoff]
20:33:30 [asir]
of which specification?
20:33:51 [Bob]
ack gpil
20:35:07 [Ashok]
Gil: I posed a challenge ... I will show an alternative method for extension that will be better that 'mode'. No one took me up on that.
20:35:24 [Wu]
20:35:52 [Ashok]
... We are within SOAP. No on will implement enevting outside of SOAP
20:36:01 [Ashok]
20:36:25 [Ashok]
... real issue is about code preservation
20:38:01 [Ashok]
Gil: Mode is like a rounding error ... many other issues involved in implemening latest WS-Eventing spec
20:38:49 [gpilz]
20:39:18 [Bob]
ack dave
20:40:42 [Ashok]
DaveS: I want Eventing to stay clean ... if it defines a single mode then that the default mode.
20:41:04 [Ashok]
... delete mode and allow attribute extensibility.
20:41:20 [gpilz]
20:41:35 [Ashok]
Wu: Need specific words... do we maintain fault msg?
20:42:19 [Bob]
ack dug
20:42:23 [Ashok]
DaveS: I don't want to wait. I would like a vote on a direction tonight.
20:43:00 [dug]
20:44:15 [Ashok]
Dug: Please respond to this note. I argued that 'mode' has problems. We have 2 mechanisms for extensibility. It's fundamentally flawed
20:44:32 [Ashok]
Wu: I responded
20:44:57 [gpilz]
"lots of ways" leads to WS-Man 1.0 Chapter 7.
20:45:04 [gpilz]
read it and be afraid
20:45:20 [asir]
20:45:58 [TRutt]
As Dave S stated, the ws eventing spec only defies a simple push delivery semantic. I see some of the proposal allowing use of a consistent use of an xs:any extension element (e.g, ) to subscribe element def to express the same capability of the mode attribute, I do not understand how this would not enable groups such as ws man to use it to give the same capability that their mod
20:45:58 [TRutt]
As an alternaive, ws-eventing users might also decide to use other ws-* mechanisms to give these "mode" like capabilities (e.g, ws man could decide to use ws-rm as an alternative to provide the equivalent capabilities of their "push with ack" mode.
20:46:23 [Bob]
ack tru
20:46:27 [Katy]
20:47:02 [Ashok]
Trutt: We can extend in many ways. Supports Dave
20:47:04 [Bob]
ack geo
20:47:38 [dug]
20:47:52 [Katy]
20:47:59 [Ashok]
Geoff: Don't see this as an extension mechanism. See it as a selection mechanism
20:48:36 [Wu]
link to my response:
20:48:42 [Ashok]
... we have nothing to vote on. We have many proposals on the table
20:49:25 [asir]
~ 7-9 proposals out there, I think
20:50:57 [gpilz]
20:52:36 [Wu]
20:53:10 [Ashok]
ACTION: Geoff to list all the different proposals for 6692 and their pros and cons. In next 2 days. Seperate proposals and argument.
20:53:10 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-63 - List all the different proposals for 6692 and their pros and cons. In next 2 days. Seperate proposals and argument. [on Geoff Bullen - due 2009-05-05].
20:53:30 [Ashok]
Topic: issue 6788
20:53:59 [gpilz]
geoff, you're going to do this on the Wiki, correct?
20:54:14 [Ashok]
Dug: Discusses wording changes
20:54:43 [Ashok]
No objection to proposal.
20:55:04 [Geoff]
Gil - Iwas planning to just send an email with the proposals
20:55:07 [Ashok]
RESOLUTION: Issue 6788 resolved with proposal in Bugzilla
20:55:31 [gpilz]
Bob directed us to use the wiki
20:55:35 [Ashok]
Topic: Issue 6694
20:55:40 [gpilz]
and I think that idea has some merits
20:55:48 [gpilz]
in that we can co-edit the proposals
20:56:54 [gpilz]
20:57:23 [Bob]
ack asir
20:57:27 [Bob]
ack gpi
20:57:33 [asir]
20:58:34 [Geoff]
20:59:09 [Bob]
ack geo
20:59:31 [Katy]
20:59:48 [asir]
21:00:01 [Bob]
ack kat
21:00:21 [gpilz]
Geoff: here's the Wiki page:
21:00:24 [Ashok]
Katy: We have another issue for implicit operations
21:00:49 [Katy]
(for policy attached to implict operations)
21:01:12 [Ashok]
Bob: Please make comments on the scribing.
21:01:20 [Zakim]
21:01:22 [Zakim]
21:01:22 [Zakim]
- +0125660aaaa
21:01:24 [Zakim]
21:01:24 [Zakim]
21:01:26 [Zakim]
21:01:32 [Zakim]
- +1.908.253.aabb
21:01:34 [Zakim]
21:01:36 [Zakim]
21:01:39 [Zakim]
21:01:40 [Zakim]
21:01:54 [Zakim]
21:02:15 [Bob]
rrsagent,make logs public
21:02:27 [Bob]
rrsagent, generate minutes
21:02:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Bob
21:03:35 [gpilz]
gpilz has left #ws-ra
21:06:33 [dug]
dug has left #ws-ra
21:06:55 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, +1.408.642.aacc, in WS_WSRA()3:30PM
21:06:57 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()3:30PM has ended
21:07:00 [Zakim]
Attendees were fmaciel, [Microsoft], Doug_Davis, +0125660aaaa, Bob_Freund, Ashok_Malhotra, Tom_Rutt, Wu_Chou, Yves, +1.908.253.aabb, Vikas, +1.408.642.aacc, Mark_Little,
21:07:02 [Zakim]
... J.Mischkinsky, JeffM
22:00:15 [TRutt]
TRutt has left #ws-ra