W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > November 2000

RE: [608] Discussion

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 08:50:55 -0800
Message-ID: <004001c0595b$67313cf0$fb4c1fac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Oisin Hurley" <ohurley@iona.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3c.org>
I think some of the confusion lies in the part "use of XP messaging over
popular" where *over* is referring to the XP layering model illustrated in
[10].

We already have to support a variety of different transport and application
protocols through the mechanism of XML protocol bindings (stated in 600 and
604 which precedes 608)

I think the point of this requirement is that security protocols are one
important example of things that one might want to make XP bindings for.

What about the text:

One particular example of protocols that one can envision XML Protocol
bindings for are protocols that provide some sort of security mechanism.
Typical examples of such protocols are SSL providing a secure channel, and
S/MIME which provides a secure wrapper. It should be possible to specify XP
bindings for such security protocols.

Henrik

[10] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xp-terms-01.html#N3040

> DR608 of the current draft [1] was ballotted to receive more
> discussion.
> To kick this off I'd like to reiterate the content of the requirement
> and mention some of the reasons why it was considered apt for more
> discussion.
>
> Current text:
>
> -----
> DR608
> The XP specification should not preclude the use of XP messaging over
> popular security mechanisms such as SSL and S/MIME.
> -----
>
> Many of the commentators felt that this requirement is inadequately
> specified.
> This is true, depending on the intention of the requirement. If the
> intention
> is there be support for specific security features in XP, then this
> requirement
> is clearly inadequate. However, this is not the intended
> purpose of the
> requirement. DR608 is contained in the section of the doc on protocol
> bindings
> and must be taken in that context. This means that the
> intention of DR608 is
> to ensure that protocol bindings for XP should take into
> account the fact
> that
> there may be a binding to a protocol and a protocol plus a
> protocol security
> mechanism.
>
> Comments and discussion encouraged :)
>
>  --oh
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xp-reqs-03
>
Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2000 11:51:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:57 GMT