RE: Model review time!

["Nieman, Scott" <Scott.Nieman@NorstanConsulting.com>]

I agree.  We raised security as a ??? question in our requirements document
coming out of Orlando - dependency from the Arch project team .  I can
easily show is as an inheritance in the Domain Package diagram with services
such as Security inheriting from an ebXML Architecture Security package.  SO
Authentication is a specialization for sure, potentially as an XML attribute
in the XML stream.  

Any more services inherited from an overall ebXML architecture - messaging?
I can add in one session with Rose.  AuthenticationError it is...

Scott Nieman

-----Original Message-----
From: srh@us.ibm.com [mailto:srh@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 5:07 PM
To: Yutaka Yoshida
Cc: ebxml-regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: Model review time!




Yutaka,
 >+ We might want to separate the authentication process, or
 >  the authentication process for SO registering could be an inheritance
 >  of the regular authentication.

I agree that authentication sequence should/will be a [potentially
specialized] StandardProtocol in ebXML.
Further, the LoginError [I would suggest AuthenticationError] should be
common across ebXML.

I have brought up (and suggesting here) that we should include Versioned
and nonVersioned
StandardBusinessProtocols and StandardErrors defined in the ebXML overall
architecture.

Thanks,
Scott R. Hinkelman
IBM Austin
SWG Java Solutions
XML/Java Standards Architecture
Office: 512-823-8097 TL793-8097
Home: 512-930-5675
Cell: 512-940-0519
srh@us.ibm.com
Fax: 512-838-1074



Yutaka Yoshida <Yutaka.Yoshida@eng.sun.com> on 03/16/2000 02:16:18 PM

Please respond to Yutaka Yoshida <Yutaka.Yoshida@eng.sun.com>

To:   ebxml-regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
cc:
Subject:  Re: Model review time!




Scott, thanks a lot for this.

 > From: "Nieman, Scott" <Scott.Nieman@NorstanConsulting.com>
 >
 > 1) determining if people can actually view via the web the model

 I had to download the zipped one because the online version had
 an applet which my browser didn't allow to run due to a security reason.
 I don't know what's wrong with it, though.

 > 2) helping review and complete the model.
 >
 > Authentication Use Case
 > Authentication Workflow Activity Diagram

 + I like the following Terry's idea, but I'm not sure
   what kind of 'software screening' Scott and Terry are thinking of.
    || "Submit anything in any form" could be made to apply to related
    || data for something in one of the formats the registry is set up to
    || handle.  Then if the submission's "principal registered item" (see
    || attached) is in one of those formats the software check would pass
it.

 + We might want to separate the authentication process, or
   the authentication process for SO registering could be an inheritance
   of the regular authentication.

 + The actor "ebXML-Compliant Business Application" says "may interface
   with a repository...". Is it not suppose to interface with registry?

 >
 > Register Submitting Organization Workflow

 + Probably, SO needs to view the status of registration.
 + Needs a start point for RA. The current start could be used for
   both SO and RA, but it needs another diverging point in that case.
   Maybe all RAs' actions in this diagram can be put into "Authorize
   Submitting Organization" Workflow because when I think about the
   sequence diagram and the collaboration diagram, SO registering
   workflow and RA authentication workflow could be ubiquitous.

 General question:
   Most of the workflows do not look like business-specific procedures,
   but do like regular flows. Do we really need to describe non-
   business specific flows in detail?
   Or, are we trying to figure out what and where the critical
   point is to satisfy business requirements?

yuta