W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy@w3.org > September 2006

Re: Policy expressions with no wire manifestation

From: Sergey Beryozkin <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 14:19:59 +0100
Message-ID: <002801c6dcb7$790d52c0$3901020a@sberyoz>
To: "Anthony Nadalin" <drsecure@us.ibm.com>
Cc: <public-ws-policy@w3.org>, <public-ws-policy-request@w3.org>
Can you please explain when and how a requester would use <sp:MustSupportRefKeyIdentifier />

Thanks, Sergey Beryozkin
Iona Technologies


  In WS-SecurityPolicy we have an assertion like <sp:MustSupportRefKeyIdentifier />, this is not marked as wsp:optional and does has no effect on the actual communication, if there is not a intersection then it will fail. I don't understand why you think that assertions that have no effect on the actual communication need to be marked as wsp:optional. 


  Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122
  "Sergey Beryozkin" <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>


                "Sergey Beryozkin" <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com> 
                Sent by: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org 
                09/20/2006 04:35 AM
       

              To 
              "Sergey Beryozkin" <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>, Anthony Nadalin/Austin/IBM@IBMUS 


              cc 
              <public-ws-policy@w3.org>, <public-ws-policy-request@w3.org> 


              Subject 
              Re: Policy expressions with no wire manifestation 
              
       

  Hi there

  That was a response in a hurry so I take it back. Before flooding the group concalls with trivial issues I'd rather attempt to make my question as clear as possible. Note that I may indeed be confused, but if so then I'd appreciate an answer which would help.

  Consider this example :

  <wsp:Policy>
  <wsp:ExactlyOnce>
  <oasis:QOSGuarantee>
  <NeverFails/>
  <TheBestServiceInThisCategory verifiedBy="..."/>
  <oasis:QOSGuarantee>
  <wsp/ExactlyOnce>
  <wsp:Policy>

  This is an example of a policy with a single alternative. This alternative contains non-optional assertions
  defined by a policy profile spec published a month ago. These assertions have no wire manifestations.
  A ws-policy aware (requester) entity whose runtime has not been updated yet to recognize <oasis:QOSGuarantee> is about to start communicating with the service which advertizes this policy. 

  Given the fact that it's likely ws-policy aware requesters will refuse to start talking to a service should they fail to support the above policy and that the fact whether this requester supports this policy or not will have no effect on the actual communication with the service this policy attached to, my understanding is that such assertions with no wire manifestations SHOULD be marked as wsp:optional :

  <wsp:Policy>
  <wsp:ExactlyOnce>
  <oasis:QOSGuarantee wsp:optional="true">
  <!-- -->
  <oasis:QOSGuarantee>
  <wsp/ExactlyOnce>
  <wsp:Policy>

  This means a requester may use this policy for a service selection but doesn't need to refuse talking to this service should it fail to recognize the policy.

  Does it make sense ? 
  What is the group's position on this issue ?

  Thanks

  Sergey Beryozkin
  Iona Technologies






graycol.gif
(image/gif attachment: graycol.gif)

ecblank.gif
(image/gif attachment: ecblank.gif)

Received on Wednesday, 20 September 2006 13:19:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:41 GMT