IRC log of ws-ra on 2009-01-14

Timestamps are in UTC.

00:01:16 [cgi-irc]
checking my nick
00:04:53 [Zakim]
00:20:39 [gpilz]
gpilz has left #ws-ra
00:29:17 [Zakim]
00:29:19 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()11:00AM has ended
00:29:20 [Zakim]
Attendees were [Microsoft], Ashok_Malhotra
01:23:21 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #ws-ra
17:12:42 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ws-ra
17:12:42 [RRSAgent]
logging to
17:12:49 [gregcarp]
I'm on the phone
17:12:55 [gregcarp]
17:13:39 [dug]
sciprname: Dug
17:13:43 [dug]
scribename: Dug
17:13:59 [Bob]
scribenick: Dug
17:14:25 [dug]
Topic: f2f schedule revisited
17:14:42 [dug]
Oracle confirmed for hosting Jun f2f
17:14:59 [dug]
Sept - Katy/IBM - requested that we adjust the date
17:15:13 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Yves
17:15:45 [dug]
Suggests week of Sept 14th
17:16:03 [dug]
hosted by IBM
17:16:07 [dug]
in UK/Hursely
17:17:10 [dug]
No objection - Sept F2F moved to week of Sept 14th in UK/Hursley hosted by IBM
17:18:59 [dug]
lunch will be at 12:45-2pm pacific
17:19:05 [Yves]
17:21:07 [prasad2]
prasad2 has joined #ws-ra
17:24:16 [dug]
Topic: Issues
17:24:40 [gpilz]
gpilz has joined #ws-ra
17:26:52 [gpilz]
it seems to me that individual implementations could build against such a permissive schema
17:27:07 [gpilz]
without us necessarily having to specify that schema in the standard
17:29:03 [dug]
issue 6391 - accepted
17:30:05 [dug]
assigned to Dug
17:33:46 [dug]
issue 6392 - accepted - assigned to Dug
17:37:55 [dug]
issues 6393-6395 - dup of 6392 - same issue, different operation
17:41:31 [dug]
issue 6396 - accepted - assigned to Dug
17:45:49 [dug]
issue 6397 - accepted - assigned to Gil
17:46:04 [gpilz]
are there multiple bugzilla instances in the W3C?
17:46:09 [dug]
17:47:48 [dug]
issue 6398 - accepted - assigned to Dug
17:48:56 [dug]
issue 6399 - accepted - assigned to Dug
17:54:14 [dug]
issue 6400 - accepted - assigned to Dug
17:55:33 [dug]
issue 6401 - accepted - assigned to Dug
17:57:33 [dug]
issue 6402 - accepted - assigned to Dug
17:59:32 [dug]
issue 6403 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:02:48 [dug]
issue 6404 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:05:43 [dug]
issue 6405 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:07:09 [dug]
issue 6406 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:08:00 [dug]
issue 6407 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:08:49 [dug]
issue 6408 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:10:21 [dug]
issue 6409 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:11:48 [dug]
issue 6410 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:15:08 [dug]
issue 6411 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:16:41 [dug]
issue 6412 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:18:35 [dug]
issue 6413 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:20:02 [dug]
issue 6414 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:21:16 [dug]
issues 6415 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:22:57 [dug]
18:23:24 [dug]
issue 6416 - accepted - assigned to Dug
18:24:30 [dug]
issue 6418 - accepted - assigned to Geoff
18:25:59 [dug]
issue 6419 - dup of 6405
18:26:51 [dug]
issue 6420 - dup of 6404
18:28:30 [dug]
issue 6421 - accepted - assigned to Geoff
18:29:36 [dug]
issue 6422 - accepted - assigned to Geoff
18:30:13 [dug]
break until 10:45 pacific
18:40:36 [Yves]
18:40:43 [Yves]
18:41:50 [prasad-2]
prasad-2 has joined #ws-ra
18:48:29 [dug]
issue 6424 - accepted - assign to Li
18:50:01 [asir]
asir has joined #ws-ra
18:52:59 [dug]
issue 6425 - accepted - assigned to Li
18:54:45 [gpilz]
18:57:19 [dug]
issue 6426 - accepted - assigned to Li
18:58:33 [Bob]
ack gp
18:58:56 [dug]
issue 6427 - accepted - assigned to Li
18:59:31 [jeffm]
jeffm has joined #ws-ra
19:00:17 [dug]
issue 6428 - accepted - assign to Li
19:02:58 [dug]
issue 6429 - accepted - assigned to Li
19:05:39 [dug]
issue 6430 - accepted - assigned to Li
19:08:09 [dug]
issue 6431 - accepted - assigned to Li
19:21:20 [Li]
Li has joined #ws-ra
19:24:25 [Li]
how can i see the ongoing presentation?
19:24:57 [Yves]
we are noodling with Bugzilla, so no presentation now
19:25:15 [Li]
19:27:36 [Yves]
19:30:03 [asir]
here is the uri if anyone needs it -
19:30:35 [Yves]
19:31:38 [dug]
issue 6432 - accepted - assigned to Gil
19:36:36 [Yves]
19:37:12 [Yves]
19:37:46 [dug]
AI: Bob to provide info to editors on format of specs and on how to covert the docs.
19:40:31 [gregcarp]
19:40:45 [gregcarp]
19:41:07 [dug]
Topic: issue 6391
19:41:08 [Yves] (for the xmlspec format)
19:41:13 [gpilz]
19:41:21 [gregcarp]
you can;t hear me
19:41:25 [gregcarp]
But I can hear you
19:41:51 [gregcarp]
can you hear me now?
19:41:55 [Ashok_Malhotra]
zakim, unmute all
19:41:55 [Zakim]
sorry, Ashok_Malhotra, I do not know which phone connection belongs to all
19:42:00 [gregcarp]
Let me dial back in
19:42:12 [gregcarp]
talk amongst yourselves :-)
19:42:15 [dug]
19:42:16 [Zakim]
19:42:22 [Bob]
ack gp
19:44:10 [Zakim]
19:44:36 [Bob]
ack greg
19:45:03 [gpilz]
19:45:09 [dug]
19:45:44 [dug]
gregc: should we allow impls to support both versions of WSA
19:45:47 [dug]
19:45:53 [Bob]
ack gp
19:46:38 [dug]
gil: impls can do more than what's in the spec
19:46:44 [dug]
... but we don't need to say that in the spec
19:47:00 [dug]
... our schema should not be loosely typed
19:47:24 [Bob]
ack dug
19:47:34 [Bob]
19:49:02 [dug]
dug: make it a new issue.
19:49:11 [dug]
... where do we stop? should we talk about WSA headers?
19:50:02 [dug]
Wu: can a w3c spec refer to a non-standardized spec?
19:50:19 [asir]
19:50:33 [gregcarp]
19:51:21 [dug]
bob: it has happened - soap11 is the prim example
19:51:23 [Zakim]
- +1.908.696.aaee
19:52:01 [dug]
19:52:29 [dug]
... ISO however doesn't like it
19:52:37 [asir]
19:53:09 [dug]
... personally, I would resist it
19:53:26 [Bob]
19:53:45 [dug]
Wu: we should require normative reference - otherwise it could cause confusion
19:56:02 [dug]
gregc: don't want a ref to old WSA - just wanted to know if we should allow the content model to be more open
19:56:42 [dug]
... ok with this as long as I can open a new issue later to extend the model
19:56:48 [dug]
... if I want
19:57:25 [Bob]
19:57:31 [Bob]
ack greg
19:58:26 [gpilz]
19:58:38 [dug]
asir: some specs allow for both - we need a proposal to know how those will be dealt with
19:58:40 [dug]
19:58:59 [Bob]
ack gpi
19:59:09 [dug]
gil: our xsd/specs should not allow both
20:00:26 [Bob]
20:00:34 [dug]
... replace xs:any with an EPR in those spots
20:00:52 [Bob]
ack dug
20:01:15 [gregcarp]
That's what I don't believe tehe current proposal endorses
20:01:28 [gregcarp]
And I don' think I'm ready to agree to that
20:02:05 [jdurand]
jdurand has joined #ws-ra
20:02:37 [dug]
dug: we should replace xs:any with 2005 EPRs
20:04:05 [gregcarp]
I am unwilling to make that call at this point
20:05:19 [gregcarp]
I am not proposing a reference to the member submission
20:06:06 [dug]
bob: 3 choices: 1) ref both, 2) xs:any->REC EPR, 3) REC EPR + extensibility
20:06:33 [dug]
actually xs:any should be xs:any or any EPR reference
20:06:45 [dug]
in option #2
20:07:35 [gregcarp]
I agree with what Bob just said
20:08:04 [dug]
bob: no one disagrees that REC must be 'in'
20:08:14 [gpilz]
20:08:35 [dug]
... extensibility points - how (and if) should they be worked into the spec?
20:09:14 [dug]
Wu: extensibility points are optional
20:09:45 [dug]
Gil: this is about schema design. Supporting both causes the use of an xs:any - its not just adding a ... after the REC EPR
20:10:13 [dug]
bob: everyone agrees with that implication
20:10:38 [dug]
gil: if this were just adding a ... but that's not what we're talking about - we're talking about having weakly typed EPRs - ie. xs:any's
20:10:55 [dug]
... its harmful - we shouldn't do it.
20:11:02 [asir]
q+ to make a general observation
20:11:12 [dug]
20:11:52 [dug]
jeff: should we stay silent on "other stuff"?
20:12:06 [Bob]
ack asir
20:12:06 [Zakim]
asir, you wanted to make a general observation
20:12:34 [dug]
asir: schemas are generally weaker than the normative text
20:12:39 [Geoff]
20:13:37 [gpilz]
20:13:50 [Ashok_Malhotra]
20:13:53 [gpilz]
separate the issues
20:13:56 [dug]
Dug: let's keep it simple for now - keep this issue about REC EPRs
20:15:10 [dug]
bob: contentious point is about extensibility - having a hard time understanding how an xs:any can be used in a conformance clause
20:15:44 [gregcarp]
simple to me means remove textual references to the submission version of addressing from the spec
20:16:12 [asir]
but this issue is more than find and replace
20:16:30 [Bob]
20:16:38 [dug]
its remove the option of other EPRs too
20:16:40 [Bob]
ack geo
20:16:46 [asir]
yes more than simple changes
20:18:23 [asir]
zakim, [Microsoft] is gregcarp
20:18:23 [Zakim]
+gregcarp; got it
20:18:56 [dug]
bob: we all agree to support REC WSA - we need to discuss extensibility and form it takes
20:19:05 [dug]
... some specs already have this and some do not
20:19:27 [dug]
... for consistency they should all be the same
20:19:40 [dug]
... can someone open an issue to discuss this issue
20:21:03 [dug]
asir: this is more than just s/2004/2005/g
20:22:27 [dug]
bob: suggests that since we're inconsistent across the specs - we need to either put them in everywhere or take then all out - but do that in a different issue
20:22:40 [dug]
... for now suggest we leave any extensibility point there for now
20:25:36 [Bob]
20:26:09 [dug]
asir: I want to see a concrete proposal
20:26:25 [dug]
bob: I want to get thru more than one issue per day
20:26:39 [dug]
asir: I see patterns
20:28:19 [dug]
bob: make the directional decision but a red-lined version will be produced
20:30:51 [dug]
... I'd like to get some kind of resolution
20:31:47 [dug]
bob: any objection to this proposal?
20:32:14 [dug]
... or to giving the editors editorial license "do the obvious"
20:32:27 [dug]
s/license/license to/
20:32:35 [dug]
but leave xs:any->EPR issue out of it for now
20:33:45 [dug]
resolution: as proposed w/o
20:34:55 [asir]
RRSAgent, where am I?
20:34:55 [RRSAgent]
20:35:36 [dug]
RT is included in the list of specs - group agrees
20:40:32 [Zakim]
20:44:39 [wuchou]
wuchou has joined #ws-ra
20:45:44 [dug]
issue states: new, assigned, resolved, incorporated, closed
20:46:54 [dug]
break for lunch - until 2pm pacific
20:47:14 [Zakim]
20:47:25 [Zakim]
20:47:26 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()11:00AM has ended
20:47:27 [Zakim]
Attendees were +1.571.262.aaaa, +1.571.262.aabb, +, Ashok_Malhotra, J.Mischkinsky, +, +1.908.696.aaee, gregcarp
20:57:51 [jdurand]
jdurand has joined #ws-ra
21:03:57 [jacques]
jacques has joined #ws-ra
22:06:48 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()11:00AM has now started
22:06:55 [Zakim]
22:08:22 [Zakim]
22:09:41 [Zakim]
22:09:44 [Zakim]
22:10:07 [Zakim]
22:12:37 [gregcarp]
Zakim [Microsoft] is gregcarp
22:15:42 [dug]
topic: issue 6392
22:15:51 [Ashok_Malhotra]
22:15:54 [dug]
Dug: let's just match the text with the schema ;-)
22:16:38 [dug]
... wsman profiles out multiple children too
22:16:49 [Geoff]
22:17:02 [prasad-2]
Will this work? ==> The presence of subsequent "embedded" child elements is service-specific and MAY be controlled by the presence or extension-specific SOAP headers in the original request
22:17:08 [Bob]
ack ashok
22:18:37 [asir]
asir has joined #ws-ra
22:18:51 [dug]
Ashok: spec is a subset of BP
22:19:23 [asir]
22:19:32 [dug]
dug: xsd and spec are inconsistent anyway
22:20:46 [dug]
ashok: why not fix the schema?
22:20:53 [Bob]
ack geoff
22:20:56 [dug]
dug: two ways to do it - change text or change xsd
22:21:16 [gpilz]
22:21:24 [dug]
geoff: don't want to remove a feature
22:21:29 [dug]
22:21:33 [Bob]
ack gpil
22:21:40 [dug]
gil: true but extensibility comes at a price
22:22:09 [dug]
... interop trumps extensibility IMO
22:22:25 [gpilz]
in this case at least
22:22:28 [gregcarp]
22:22:43 [wuchou]
wuchou has joined #ws-ra
22:23:02 [gpilz]
it would be a different matter if there were some clear and compelling use cases for extending the response
22:23:24 [dug]
dug: perhaps we should have done the wrapper first
22:23:30 [Bob]
ack greg
22:24:18 [dug]
gregc: soap12 clearly allows multiple children in the body
22:24:48 [asir]
asir has joined #ws-ra
22:24:59 [dug]
... we don't view BP2.0 as a replacement for soap1.2
22:25:05 [Yves]
22:25:10 [Yves]
22:25:35 [dug]
topic: issue 6397
22:26:11 [Bob]
20 minutes cap
22:26:14 [dug]
gil: remove the SubscriptionMgr EPR from the SubscriptionEnd message
22:26:38 [dug]
... add text that talks about how you can use ref-params
22:27:27 [dug]
Geoff: generally fine
22:27:59 [dug]
Dug: as an editor - keep the stuff about ref-params?
22:28:15 [gpilz]
Note, Subscribers wishing to correlate SubscriptionEnd messages with subscriptions may wish to add ReferenceParameters to the EndTo EPR.
22:28:58 [gpilz]
(insert in description of EndTo EPR in section on Subscribe)
22:32:01 [dug]
action: Gil to write up a more detailed proposal
22:32:18 [asir]
s/proposal/proposal for 6397/
22:33:21 [dug]
topic: issue 6398
22:33:56 [gregcarp]
some one fax me a beer please ...
22:34:57 [Geoff]
22:35:06 [dug]
Dug: goes over the issue
22:36:08 [dug]
Geoff: what about createResponse?
22:36:13 [dug]
Dug: an oversight - that would be included
22:36:46 [dug]
Geoff: unclear what impact this will have
22:36:50 [dug]
22:37:02 [dug]
Geoff: would like to see the impact on referenced specs
22:37:06 [asir]
22:37:35 [gpilz]
pretty clear we can't close anything without more detail
22:37:56 [gpilz]
let's just recess for the rest of the afternoon so we can work on more detailed proposals
22:39:07 [Bob]
22:39:29 [Bob]
ack asir
22:41:46 [Bob]
22:46:30 [gpilz]
22:46:49 [Bob]
ack gpil
22:49:33 [prasad-2]
22:51:07 [Dug]
Dug has joined #ws-ra
22:51:12 [Bob]
action: Dug to amplify proposal for 6398 correcting oversite of CreateResponse and to examine efect of RT, or other specs in-charter that reference Transfer as required.
22:51:41 [Bob]
s/of RT/on RT
22:54:28 [asir]
asir has joined #ws-ra
22:54:44 [Bob]
22:55:31 [Ashok_Malhotra]
22:55:43 [Bob]
ack ashok
22:57:36 [Yves]
<Dug> Dug: we should have policy to describe all of the various options in the specs
22:57:53 [Yves]
<Dug> Yves: what about the client sending in what it can support and the server choosing the best match?
22:58:32 [dug_]
dug_ has joined #ws-ra
22:58:44 [gpilz]
22:58:51 [dug]
Dug: define policy for each optional feature of the specs
22:59:17 [dug]
Yves: why not let the client send in what it supports and let the server pick the best from that list?
22:59:54 [dug]
Geoff: proposal says to define policy expressions - but it doesn't say 'how' to use them.
23:00:09 [dug]
... wording around them about how to use them successfully.
23:00:58 [dug]
Dug: examples? sure we can add those as needed.
23:01:05 [prasad-2]
23:01:17 [asir]
23:01:31 [wuchou]
23:02:36 [dug]
gil: client sending in what it can support might not work - might not be scalable.
23:03:19 [dug]
... examples: negotiation of policy is probably better left for a primer
23:03:27 [Yves]
sending _everything_ supported by the client definitely won't fly, sending a shortlist of _preferred_ options (and let the server decide if it doesn;t match is much more practical
23:04:52 [dug]
prasad: flat list of assertions or nested?
23:05:01 [gregcarp]
23:05:06 [dug]
Dug: could be a combination - will probably depend on the specific feature
23:05:18 [Bob]
Bob has joined #ws-ra
23:05:28 [Bob]
23:05:38 [dug]
Asir: policy group wrote a best practices around this
23:05:47 [Bob]
ack gpil
23:05:58 [Bob]
ack pras
23:06:11 [asir]
33 point check list at
23:06:19 [Bob]
ack asir
23:06:32 [asir]
23:06:50 [Bob]
ck wu
23:06:56 [Bob]
ack wu
23:07:30 [dug]
wu: would like to understand the impact - would like a light-weight solution
23:07:37 [asir]
23:08:12 [dug]
... is policy optional?
23:08:17 [dug]
Dug: yes - optional
23:08:24 [Bob]
ack greg
23:08:50 [dug]
gregc: security should be done by security policy
23:09:10 [dug]
asir: while metadata is optional , if everyone uses it then its not so optional
23:09:29 [Ashok_Malhotra]
Ashok_Malhotra has joined #ws-ra
23:09:30 [dug]
... lean expressions is the key
23:11:24 [dug]
Wu: would like to see some concrete examples
23:12:29 [dug]
action: issue 6402 - Dug to write up a detailed proposal
23:12:53 [Ashok_Malhotra]
Ashok_Malhotra has joined #ws-ra
23:13:00 [Ashok_Malhotra]
Ashok_Malhotra has joined #ws-ra
23:15:21 [dug]
topic: issue 6404
23:19:51 [dug]
Dug: proposal mex = everything you can and default == 'mex'
23:20:29 [dug]
Asir: goes over the proposal from the workshop
23:20:37 [dug]
... no dialect == up to provider
23:20:50 [dug]
... mex dialect == all known dialects
23:20:52 [dug]
23:21:33 [jeffm]
jeffm has joined #ws-ra
23:23:23 [Bob]
ack asir
23:23:26 [Bob]
ack dug
23:23:59 [Ashok_Malhotra]
Do you want to remove the 'whatever' option?
23:24:11 [gregcarp]
23:24:26 [Bob]
ack greg
23:25:21 [prasad-2]
23:25:54 [dug]
gregc: what if I'm a metadata browser
23:25:56 [dug]
23:26:25 [Bob]
ack prasad
23:27:05 [dug]
prasad: what does 'all metadata' mean?
23:27:21 [dug]
dug: gimme everything I'm allowed to see
23:28:10 [dug]
... I'd like to understand this 'whatever' option better
23:28:54 [dug]
asir: not sure where the ambiguity is
23:29:03 [Ashok_Malhotra]
23:29:41 [dug]
ashok: dug is asking: what's it purpose? what does it do?
23:29:51 [Bob]
ack ashok
23:29:57 [dug]
... tell us more about it? how? for what purpose?
23:32:44 [prasad-2]
What metadata is visible to a client is subject to visibility constraints associated with the identity of the client and policy associated with the provider. We need to qualify *all* metadata (MEX) option needs to clarify that. That is the client may not be entitled to see all metadata even if the client asks for it.
23:33:27 [dug]
Gil: can't think of an example of why someone would do this
23:34:32 [jacques]
Just replace both "everything" and "whatever" with: "allyoucan"
23:36:09 [prasad-2]
s/needs to/ to/
23:39:30 [gregcarp]
Is the 'r' silent in that "whatever", or not? :-)
23:39:53 [Ashok_Malhotra]
23:50:36 [gregcarp]
23:51:10 [gregcarp]
23:52:13 [dug]
action: issue 6404 - Geoff to write up why we need "whatever"? what's it purpose - and a new proposal
23:56:26 [dug]
topic: 6397
23:56:34 [dug]
Gil - talks about his concrete proposal
23:57:02 [dug]
00:03:36 [dug]
resolved: new proposal accepted w/o
00:03:39 [dug]
and they all rejoiced
00:04:53 [Bob]
rrsagent, where am i?
00:04:53 [RRSAgent]
00:05:20 [asir]
Thanks Gil!
00:07:08 [Zakim]
00:13:10 [Zakim]
00:18:56 [dug]
topic: issue 6405
00:22:50 [prasad-2]
00:23:07 [Zakim]
00:24:57 [dug]
Dug: explained proposal
00:25:15 [dug]
Jeff: need to define the skip
00:25:24 [Bob]
ack prasad
00:25:33 [Zakim]
00:26:05 [asir]
00:27:40 [Bob]
ack asir
00:29:48 [dug]
asir: 'format' might not be the best word for it
00:32:28 [dug]
default == any, define an "all" dialect
00:36:55 [dug]
(dialect (identifier)?)? (format)*
00:38:42 [dug]
define a 'any' dialect
00:38:52 [dug]
per jeff's comment, clarify that what 'skip' means - meaning no metadata section for that dialect/format
00:39:12 [gregcarp]
00:39:31 [Bob]
ack greg
00:41:39 [gpilz]
suggest synonyms for "format"; embodiment, incarnation
00:41:54 [dug]
gregc: would policy help here?
00:42:18 [dug]
dug: for advertising which are available,yes, but not for providing a hint
00:46:17 [gpilz]
00:46:22 [dug]
ai: issue 6405 - Doug to write up the above mods in a note/proposal
00:46:29 [gpilz]
00:48:48 [gregcarp]
00:48:57 [gregcarp]
regarding the optimization
00:49:27 [dug]
topic: issue 6409
00:49:44 [gregcarp]
00:51:27 [dug]
defer - people need to talk to devs
00:51:54 [Zakim]
00:55:35 [gregcarp]
q+ I need a clarification
00:55:46 [gregcarp]
00:57:07 [Bob]
ack greg
01:01:50 [dug]
topic: issue 6412
01:02:36 [dug]
dug - describes the proposal
01:06:06 [dug]
modification - make sure the PutModeNotSupported fault includes the uri
01:07:59 [dug]
resolution: accepted w/o with the modification to the fault mentioned above
01:08:13 [Bob]
rrsagent, where am i
01:08:13 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'where am i', Bob. Try /msg RRSAgent help
01:08:50 [Bob]
rrsagent, where am i?
01:08:50 [RRSAgent]
01:12:28 [dug]
topic: new issues
01:14:18 [dug]
issue 6433 - accepted - assigned to Gil
01:18:57 [dug]
issue 6435 - accepted - assigned to Gil
01:20:49 [dug]
issue 6436 - accepted - assigned to Gil
01:22:49 [Geoff]
01:23:49 [dug]
topic: issue 6408
01:24:01 [dug]
dug describes the issue
01:24:05 [Bob]
ack geoff
01:25:09 [dug]
geoff: could be a very large burden on the service
01:31:26 [Bob]
01:31:33 [prasad-2]
01:32:58 [gregcarp]
01:33:25 [Bob]
ack bob
01:34:00 [Bob]
ack prasad
01:35:09 [Bob]
ack greg
01:36:16 [gregcarp]
01:37:24 [Zakim]
01:38:59 [Bob]
ack greg
01:42:24 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, ??P11, in WS_WSRA()11:00AM
01:42:25 [Zakim]
WS_WSRA()11:00AM has ended
01:42:28 [Zakim]
Attendees were Ashok_Malhotra, [Microsoft]
01:48:41 [Bob]
rrsagent pointer?
01:49:05 [Bob]
rrsagent, pointer?
01:49:05 [RRSAgent]
01:49:54 [asir]
RRSAgent, where am I?
01:49:54 [RRSAgent]
01:51:11 [Bob]
rrsagent, make logs public
01:51:23 [Bob]
rrsagent, generate minutes
01:51:23 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Bob
01:57:26 [gpilz]
gpilz has left #ws-ra
04:00:45 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #ws-ra