OASIS ebXML Collaboration Protocol Profile and Agreement TC
ebXML CPPA Technical Committee Teleconference
November 1, 2001
Dale requested volunteers to host future teleconferences. Hima volunteered that Sybase can sponsor calls for the next month. David Smiley said that Mercator could probably host the December calls.
Dale called for agenda items for the voting teleconference next week. They can be sent to the list.
Service / Action
Hima reminded us that he'd suggested hierarchical naming for services, but Arvola had noted that multiple collaborations could occur under the same service, so he feels it makes more sense to make the actions hierarchical. Brian asked whether IDREFs to BPSS could be used. Marty indicated that BPSS was missing IDs in several crucial places; Brian suggested that the omissions could be fixed in BPSS 1.1. Marty mentioned that QNames (XSD) could be used. Hima will look into it.
Arvola reported on the MSG teleconference that took place this past Monday. Their next F2F is set for Nov. 13 - 15 with both an East coast location in the Boston area and a West coast location in Pleasanton. The MSG committee went through and resolved all of their editorial issues along with some minor technical issues. F2F attendees affiliated with CPPA - including Arvola, Brian, Dale, and Hima - will get together there for a sidebar discussion.
Arvola took the opportunity to mention a CPPA/BPSS alignment issue that he had raised on the list - see his Oct. 31, 2001 email on the subject of "[ebxml-cppa] BPSS & CPP/A alignment issue: synchronous vs asynchronous flow of control." Dale is concerned about the interaction between business level retries and messaging level retries. Arvola said that Paul Levine will be the editor of the ebTWG metamodel specification and that feedback can be sent to him.
Dale is still filling in for Tim Collier. Dale remarked that any volunteer to lead the security team should contact him and would likely get the job.
Marty still hasn't received comments on his document other than from Yukinori Saito.
Assuming there's no reason to wait further, he plans to schedule conference calls. He again asked for feedback.
Brian reported that the BPPSS team has captured relevant issues from our issues list, retaining our ID numbers. They've targeted our version 1.1 interlock issues with BPSS for their own version 1.1 and given top priority to CPPA and MSG issues. They hope to have a draft document by January
PartyName and PartyRef
Resolution of PartyName and PartyRef issues was deferred until Jean Zheng can participate.
CPAId, PartyID and Messaging
On a MSG topic, Marty took the opportunity to bring up a private email discussion he had with Dale about the identity of an MSH, where they settled on the combination of CPAId plus PartyID. Dale will send a draft summary to Marty and put it on the list.
Marty also reminded us of the need for a normative statement that the CPAId value in the CPA SHALL be used as the value of the CPAId in the message header. Tony W. responded that the issue has been captured. Marty remarked that the CPAId becomes a negotiation matter.
Schema Straw Proposal
Arvola noted that ActionBinding was introduced mainly to associate different packaging schemes with different actions under ServiceBinding. Dale recalled that Marty and Chris had wanted to avoid such a fine-grained approach for version 1.0. Marty responded that their position was mostly due to lack of time. Arvola also noted that the delivery channel might be synchronous, in which case it's necessary to describe packaging for both the request message and the response message. Dale spoke in favor of the proposed change and indicated that we'll go ahead with it since there has been little dissent. Marty raised the long term (beyond 1.1) question of whether delivery channels need to be restructured so they're not strictly receive-only - the other party's certificate is needed for client-side authentication. Arvola added the case of non-repudiation, which Marty agreed was the most important case. Hima has an action item to prepare a proposal that captures sender and receiver properties for a delivery channel. Arvola will clarify the purposes of the various certificate references by introducing a number of different CertificateRef-type elements sharing a single complex type. Dale indicated that the security group will adopt a similar style of XSD usage.
Arvola observed that under Packaging there's only a single CompositeList. He questioned whether a repeating element might be necessary for cases where there are multiple types of response, e.g., normal and error responses.
Another aspect of Arvola's proposal allows SimplePart to be reused. For example, a SimplePart for the ebXML message header will be reused in many different Packages.
Dale noted that there are now several modules for a SimplePart that represents a SOAP envelope and asked whether the modules would be put into a SimplePart. Arvola was unsure about that since it would be really fine grained - those properties could also be represented in the DeliveryChannel's Characteristics element. Marty reminded us that Characteristics are mostly used for overrides of BPSS attributes. [The exception is syncReplyMode.] As an aesthetic issue, he suggested a separate element for items related to Messaging. Dale agreed that Marty's suggestion would facilitate explanation.
Hima pointed out that SimplePart should capture the schema for the messaging payload as given in the messaging Manifest. He will draft an issue and send it to Tony W.
Tony Fletcher asked whether there's a new draft of the CPPA specification. Dale responded that we're working to stabilize the schema before documenting things.
There will be another teleconference next week on November 8. We will take up PartyName/PartyRef if Marty and Jean are both present. We will focus on security, so Dale encouraged us to review his security proposal and Arvola's proposal for new flavors of CertificateRef's.