W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > March 2002

RE: D-AG006 Security

From: Joseph Hui <jhui@digisle.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 15:48:33 -0800
Message-ID: <C153D39717E5F444B81E7B85018A460B06685884@ex-sj-5.digisle.com>
To: <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
> -----Original Message-----
[snip]
> Or are you talking about the idea of "rolling
> back" a transaction if it fails ...

This type of course -- one atomic operation, do all or
do none -- the type that generally employs 2-phase-commit
algorithms.

Joe Hui
Exodus, a Cable & Wireless service
========================================= 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph Hui [mailto:jhui@digisle.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:14 PM
> To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler); Krishna Sankar; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: D-AG006 Security
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> [snip]
> > Could we possibly consider putting reliable messaging into
> > the security bucket?  
> 
> I don't think so.  There's no security primitives that
> would fit the bill of reliable messaging (RM), which I sometimes
> characterize as "layer-7 TCP" where a session between two 
> endpoints may span
> over several time-serialized connections, disconnections, 
> reconnections.
> AG006 may include securing RM, but not RM per se.
> 
> While at it, let me mention that if you want to include 
> RM in WS-Arch, then you may as well not leave out transaction 
> processing.
> 
> [snip]
> > it is a natural
> > progression of thought:  "I'm worried about who the author of
> > the message
> > is, whether it is distorted, and that IT ACTUALLY GETS THERE".
>                                         
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There no
> security primitives that can guarantee data arrival.
> 
> Joe Hui
> Exodus, a Cable & Wireless service
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 12 March 2002 18:48:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:24:56 GMT