W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > April 2003

RE: Quality of Service

From: Jeffrey Schlimmer <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 11:00:42 -0700
Message-ID: <2E33960095B58E40A4D3345AB9F65EC109D200DE@win-msg-01.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
To: <info@johanpeeters.com>
Cc: <mrbannon@uwaterloo.ca>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Johan Peeters writes:
>There has been some discussion at the OASIS WSS TC about QoP 
>(Quality of Protection) which I would consider as a subset
>of QoS. My understanding is that they are currently thinking 
>of introducing a new binding, secure SOAP, that would have
>extensions allowing you to specify the QoP. Is this the way 
>to go? I personally would hope for a more orthogonal
>definition of QoP (and other QoS aspects for that matter)


>I.e. a QoP can apply to a web service regardless of
>whether its wire format is SOAP or not. It seems to
>me that WS-Policy might just do that.

WS-Security uses WS-Policy to state security requirements independent of
the specific port type or the underlying transport. 


>But that is by-the-by. What I really want to know is this: what 
>are the respective responsibilities of the W3C WS description 
>WG and the OASIS WSS TC working group wrt QoP/QoS descriptions

The W3C Web Service Description (WSDL) Working Group (WG) charter is the
official answer.


The current WSDL 1.2 draft allows annotations. Annotations could be
defined to indicate QoP or QoS, but my guess is that the WG will not
define them.

>and how will the pieces ever fit together?

I am not intimately familiar with the charter of the Oasis WSS TC, but
note that WS-I has played an integration role in the past.


>Will a WSDL 1.2 specification tell us, for example, whether a
>secure SOAP message is required to access a service?

WS-PolicyAttachment defines a means to indicate within a WSDL 1.1
document that a service requires general policy (or security policy
specifically). I would be very surprised if similar mechanisms do not
exist for WSDL 1.2 by the time it is finalized.


>What if the binding is not SOAP?

If bindings are allowed to have different message data and/or processing
models, then it will be difficult to define annotations that can be
generally applied to the different architectures.
Received on Thursday, 17 April 2003 14:00:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:54:42 UTC