PSTC F2F#4

February 11th & 12th 2003

Agenda

• Review Agenda• Define F2F Goals• Admin (accept minutes)• Burton Catalysts Proposal• Timeline & Project Plan Review• Core Operations Discussion• Request / Response Discussion• ExtendedRequest Discussion• Query Schema Discussion• Bindings Discussion• Specification Review• Next Steps & Action Items

F2F Goals

• Commitment on Burton Catalyst Proposal

• Committed timeline to submission of 1.0

• Complete core 1.0 schema

• Agree 1.0 specification document structure

• Defined sample XML for a simple example

• Define task lists and task owners for outstanding work items

Admin

• Vote to accept minutes of committee meeting January 20th 2003

• Vote to accept minutes of committee meeting February 3rd 2003

Burton Catalysts Proposal

• Event– Burton Catalyst - July 9-11 2003 - San Francisco– Possible repeat event in EMEA fall of 2003 (not

connected or mandatory)– Usual attendee is CIO CSO, network architect, good

press profile and entire Burton consulting and analyst teams

– Premier north American event for the technical influencer and network architect

Burton Catalysts Proposal

• Inter-op Goals– Show that SPML is real and facilitates interoperability between

vendors in the Identity Management and Enterprise Provisioning space

– Mirror the structure, goals and (hopefully success) of the SAML interop event held at Catalyst 2002

– Provide a real world “hard-stop” to aid in the deliver and true interoperability of SPML

– Gain healthy exposure for participating vendors

– Not to show any one product – interop HAS TO be focused on the open standard not on the vendor implementation. In return both OASIS and Burton will very publicly support the event

Burton Catalysts Proposal

• Inter-op Structure– Separate SPML inter-op room - not part of the hospitality suites

(possible participant cost of $500)– Run concurrently with the hospitality suites – one night only– Possible private pre-view for press and Burton analyst earlier in

the day of interop– Setup day before the conference– Based on last years SAML interop we could expect heavy traffic

to the interop room– OASIS would broker the production of a “one-sheet” outline of

SPML, the interop event and the vendors participating. This could possibly in in the registration packs for ALL ATTENDEES!

Burton Catalysts Proposal

• Inter-op Scenario– Pre-defined simple integration demo that shows the exchange of

service provisioning requests based on the SPML 1.0 schema and specification

– Emphasis on attendee participation – the attendee basically subscribes to a service that results in account creation across all vendor stations

– Each vendor would run a common SPML client and would issue SPML addRequests to the other participating vendors

– Those vendors that wish to show SPML enabled PST’s (resources) would be given a guarantee that at lest one PSP vendor would support request flows down to their application

– After successful subscription the attendee would be able to “see their account” existing in any/all of the participating vendors “systems”

Burton Catalysts Proposal

• Interop commitment– Requires eight committed participants – So far we have:

Committed Likely Possible Contact

Waveset BMC Netegrity CriticalPath

OpenNetwork Microsoft Entrust Jamcracker

BusinessLayers IBM ePresence

Entrust Big4

Burton Catalysts Proposal

• Demo scenario

Common RA

Vendor PSP

Vendor PSP

Vendor PSP

Vendor PSP

Vendor PST

Vendor PST

Burton Catalysts Proposal

• Next Steps– Vendor commitment!– Vote to accept submission with implied

commitment on part of those present– Complete Burton application on Catalyst site– Create a sub committee

• Define a detailed technical plan & LOE• Coordinate process

– Pre inter-op inter-op in mid June

Time Line & Project Plan

For submitting 1.0 specification

Time Line

• Burton proposal March 13th • Spec internal committee review start March 1st

• OASIS 30 day approval cycle start April 1st

• Spec date Middle of May• Pre inter-op glue party in Austin June

February 1st March 1st April 1st May 1st June 1st

Cata

lyst

Pre-inter-op test

Sub

mission

F2F

#4

Acceptance

Burton

decision

Deta

iled inter-op plan

Project Plan# Due

DateOwner

1 ExtendedRequest Schema•Resolve outstanding ExtendedRequest schema issues•XML Schema•Code sample

JeffBYoavK

2 Query Schema•Review/iterate over latest proposal until consensus reached•XML schema•Code sample

JeffBYoavK

4 Bindings • Open recommendations or spec detail• SOAP/WSS example with normative description• File based binding – in 1.0 or not??

??

5 SPEC - Specification example and description (NN) Editors

6 SPEC - General overview text & object model overview text (NN) Editors

7 SPEC - Introductions to system elements – describe a PST (NN) Editors

8 SPEC - Element introductions – Operations & R/R schema – description & XML samples (NN) Editors

9 SPEC - Example1 – Full code example – simple case that is a fully sample of the example used throughout the spec (NN)

Editors

10 SPEC - Example 2 – Second full code example – more complex possibly aggregated request sample (NN) Editors

11 SPEC - Core operations normative text Editors

12 SPEC - Request Response normative text Editors

13 SPEC - RA Functional Requirements (N) Editors

Project Plan# Due

DateOwner

14 SPEC - PSP Functional Requirements (N) Editors

15 SPEC - Request ID functional requirements (N) Editors

16 SPEC – PSO functional requirements (N) Editors

17 SPEC – PTD-ID functional requirements (N) Editors

18 SPEC – ExtendedRequest rules, usage guidelines & example (NN) Editors

19 SPEC – Conformance matrix & recommendations Editors

20 SPEC – Conformance tests Editors

21 SPEC – Final document editorial – references, index, formatting etc Editors

22 Catalyst Technical Plan• Detailed scenario description• Technical specs for RA & PSP for use in inter-op

DR

23 Catalyst Pre-Event Dry Run• Hosted in Austin??• 2 day glue party plan, complete lab setup• Test to technical plan

24 Inter-op press and briefing materials• Help with release• PPT models of inter-op

Core Operations

Review

Core Operations

• Review

• Approve

• Thoughts on normative text

Request / Response

Review

Request / Response

• Review

• Approve

• Thoughts on normative text

ExtendedRequest

Discussion & Review

ExtendedRequest

• Review revised schema

• Resolve ProvID issue

• Approve

• Discuss extensibility section of specification– Normative text on use of ExtendedRequest– Example

• Define lead for above

Query Schema

Discussion & Planning

Query Schema

• Status

• Model

• 1.0 time line and criticality for interoperability

Bindings

Discussion & Planning

Bindings

• Level set – SPML bindings• Should this be a separate document?• Is a file based adapter still in scope for 1.0?• How is the SOAP binding effected by WSS

delivery date?• Lead to define this for the specification?

Specification

Specification

• Examples– Example 1 (& throughout doc)

• Simple case AddRequest/AddResponse• Basic user account oriented service that provisions

an email (exchange) account• SOAP request for new service from known client• Use SPML:1.0:core#DN PSO-ID• Pre-defined simple schema

Specification

• Examples– Example 2

• Complex aggregated case AddRequest/Response• Request for “AggregatedService” Mail & Directory• RA-PSP1 – PSP1 creates mail account (just like

example 1)• PSP1-PSP2 – PSP2 creates directory entry• PSP1 returns results to user• Use SPML:1.0:core#DN• Pre-defined merged schema

Specification

• Conformance– What does conformance mean for SPML?– Review current matrix– Should we provide “automated” tests?– WS-I profiles?

Next Steps

Action items review