OASIS WSDM TC Face To Face Agenda

October, 2004

Hitachi, Boston, MA

Agenda, Wendsday October 20th

Afternoon Session12:00pm – 01:00pm Arrivals, Lunch, Roll, Agenda

adjusting, Minute taker, AI Review, Laison StatusDMTF: Utility WG, State WG, Interop CIM-SOAPGGF: OGSA CMMOASIS: Security TC

01:00pm - 02:00pm MUWS Concepts rework – Igor/William

02:00pm – 03:00pm Metrics Updates – Bryan03:00pm – 04:00pm MUWS Capability Proposal Review –

Heather04:00pm – 05:00pm Configuration Capability Proposal

Review – Heather05:00pm – 06:30pm Discovery section proposal review –

Heather

Agenda, Thursday October 21st

Morning Session

• 9:00a: Metadata– WS-RF Support– WSDM specific metadata

• 11:00a: State update discussion (Nick/Karl)

• noon - lunch

Agenda, Thursday October 21st

Afternoon Session• 01:00p – 04:00p WSDM Event Format – Tom

Studwell/Heather• 04:00p – 05:00p MOWS Review - Igor• 05:00p – 06:30p WS-CIM

– WS-Management – WSDM WS-CIM mapping proposal –

William/Heather/Igor

• 06:30 pm - End of Day• 07:00 pm - Dinner!

AgendaFriday, October 22nd

• 8:00 Primer Review• 9:00 Specification Publication Planning MUWS

– AIs for 1.0– Issues Review & resolution plan– Update schedule

• 10:00 Specification Publication Planning MOWS– AIs for 1.0– Issues Review and resolution plan– Update schedule

• 11:00 Next F2F Planning• 11:15 Next Interop Planning

– Spec levels for platforms – Nov (w/ Spec)– Scenario – end year– Ongoing external endpoints w/ virtual interops?– Internal Date – 1.0 Mid Feb – External Date – March?– Ongoing document of interactions that should be testable and should work – Mike

Clements

Laisons• DMTF:

– Utility WG – prioritizing use cases, not just server oriented, next week at f2f, this will drive profiles to tie together sets of cim classes for a use. These use cases should be valuable to us as well.

AI: review use cases from Utility WG when they are readyAI: relationship between CIM Profiles and WSDM Capabilities proposal;

Andrea will try to post a pointer to a overview in DMTF– State WG – state model, transition encoding; determine state based on

model, research group in France w/ concrete proposal, a language alongside cim to describe semantics behind a state, how it is transitioned/determined, based on UML state work. New use cases from server management wg.

AI: pointer to requirements document for WSDM? Andrea – Interop CIM-SOAP & WS-CIM – CIM-SOAP phase 3 + Server Mgt

structure protocol; WMX possible proposed solution from MS, Rejustifying early decision to be WSDM based. Revisiting requirements.

• GGF: – OGSA

• OASIS: Security TC

MUWS Concepts Rework

• AIs

• Issues

• Questions– Do we need normative Identity/Name/Address

definitions? (Review proposed by Heather)

Metrics

• AIs

• Issues

Capabilities

• AI

• Issues

Configuration Capability

• AI

• Issues

Discovery Section

• Advertise– Event– Register

• Discover– Relationship– Registry

• AI

• Issues

Metadata

• AIs– Management Specific: Add metadata content to

specification – Heather/Homayoun/William/Warren/Andrea (Proposed)

• General• Capability Properties/Operations• Relationships – WSDM 1.0?

– Directionality and Role Interface– Supported, Required, Cardinality

– WS-RF Support: Rendering for WSDM 1.0• Revisit rendering decision when there’s a ws-rf metadata doc

if its by Sept something

• Issues

State

• AI– Operational state change will need a State Change

Event; which OperationalStateChange can extend and RequestProcessingState change can extend

• Issues– State model(s)

• Representation of valid States – Marking States that upon entry emit events

• Representation of valid Transitions and marking those that emit events

– Meta information– Notifications

WSDM Event Format

• Review framework

• Review descriptions

• AIs

• Issues

MOWS Review

• AI– Metadata?

• Issues

WS-CIM

• WS-Management

• WS-CIM charter

• WS-CIM requirements

• WS-CIM WSDM Mapping

• AIs

• Issues

Primer Review

• AIs

• Issues

• Publication Plan

MUWS Publication Planning• AIs

– Conceptual Model• Normative Name/Identity description?

– Event Format– Configuration Capabilities– Metadata– Discovery/Registry

• Issues– Collections support– Relationships and Service Group alignment– Hibernated Relationship Issues– Security

• Schedule– All Input in Nov 8– Review Draft Nov 15?– Committee Draft Nov 31

• OASIS Process

MOWS Publication Planning

• AIs

• Issues

• Schedule– All Input in Nov 8– Review Draft Nov 15?– Committee Draft Nov 31.

Action Items – June F2F• Use cases, Profiles from Utility WG• Capabilities – HK writeup, done

– Scenario – HK, done– Taxonomy/portTypes – Igor, done

• CBE-CIM mapping – Andrea, done• Registry – Fred writeup, done• Conceptual model followup with WS-Addressing in IBM –

Heather, done• WSDM requirements for WS-RF and WS-Notification –

Warren, done• WSDM discovery requirements for WS-RF – Warren,

done• Correlatable properties write up – Igor, done• Relationships – concept model – Igor, done• Security Questions – Andreas,?

Action Items Aug F2F

• WS-RF requirement, done• WS-Notification requirement –content filter, done• Progressing Event format, proposed• Relationships issues resolution, done• Internationalization of ‘Names’, done• Normative description of Name and Identity

(Heather), proposed• MetaData proposals in MUWS (hk+group),

proposed

Outstanding Work: MUWS and MOWS

Champion, assign #calls they have to work in, scope of items (w/ some scope perhaps not in 1.0).

• Finish discovery – done; need primer• Meta information – IP, Proposed• Relationships – done; need WSDM 2.0 requirements• Notifications mechanism – document decisions and how to use - done• Event Formats – IP, Proposed• Collections • Finishing capabilities: - IP, Proposed

– Identity (version/)– State– Metrics

• New Capabilities– Configuration – IP, Proposed– Correlatable Properties - done

• MOWS Request processing model -done• MOWS managing per operation - • Security• ?Change Management

MUWS 2.0

• Line Items– Accommodate standardized versions of

dependent specifications

• AIs

• Issues

F2F Planning

• December? Or January?

• West Coast? Or Central (Austin/Colorado)

• Preparing for Interop or IS the Interop?

Interop Planning

• Jan? or Feb?

• Next F2F?

• AI: Scenario development– Who and by When?

Supporting Material Notes from last F2F

•

Discovery issues/resolution1. ?Disc01 – epr-wsdl: accepted by RF; interim sol’n for 1.0?: wsdlLocation type uri in EPR as attribute of

PortType element.?alternative to ws-mdx; do we need to indicate mdx vs location; 2. Closed. P.Disc02 – wsdl-epr: submit req to RF – close today3. Primer. P.Disc03 – getEPRs – Relationship.getRelated or aquire Service Group of4. Primer. P.Disc04 – find all MEndpoints for a MResource – Relationships, new relationship type, ‘works on

same resource’?, (AI: issue.to.relationships work?) P: do thru registry/SG w/ Identity content &/or correlatable names model

5. Closed. P.Disc05 – are MEndpoints for same resource, - Identity/Correlatable names, done, closed. 6. Primer. Disc06 – find capabilities of a MResource – interface/portType search, issue, wsdl1.1 loses

interface/portType inheritence, follow RF solution?; Spec: AI: Open discussion on finding by capability to be closed, closed.; Primer: use of.

7. Closed. Disc07 – find mgmt portTypes – Is a capabilities issue; understand qname and extensions of portTypes. Dup of Disc06

8. Primer. P.Disc08 – find related resources – Relationships, done, Primer9. Closed. P. Disc09 – find in a MResource repository/registry: uddi: technote for mapping wsdm into uddi, find

MR resource reg, find MR; You can get EPRs from registries just like you can get WSDLs. Issue: do we need standard registry/collection? Yes. Submitted integration of registries into discovery. Closed

10. Closed. Disc10 – broadcast type discovery - drop requirement for 1.0; doesn’t preclude use of or registries use of. Closed.

11. Closed. Disc11 – subscribe to MResource lifecycle events – Notification provides subscribe. Need to address creation/deletion event definition. Issue: where to subscribe to create. Have cr/del on relationship as one way to see if one of those participants is new, WSRF has a destroy event. Issue: who do you subscribe to for create? If a registry in system, like SG, you could subscribe to ‘adds’. Define a create event/topic that ‘things that create things’ can/should emit. ‘creation capability’ independent of ‘factory’. Creation capability might advertise that it sends creation events and for what kinds of things. Should we do the same for Destruction capability, i.e. something that destroys things and issues events that its destroyed. ? Advertising? I found/lost something and I’m telling you vs I actually personally created/destroyed it. AI: William will write up a capability that emits create/destroy events. Closed

Primer? What out of this is normative? Is it all ‘advice’? – Bryan Murray will lead (william will help)

Registry/Collections• Do we define Registry/Repository note ?• Is it different from a registry? • Do we define a collection? Yes. Can we depend on Service Group.• Is a collection different from a relationship?

– SG today has a ‘memberEntry’ WS-resource w/ pointer to SG and member (which looks like a relationship).

• Collections offer scaleability – operate on all resources in collection– Issue which resources returned what values operations returned

• collection of responses– Is this a generic ‘OperableCollection’? responseCollection = operableServiceGroup.invoke(‘stop’,

parameters).– Is this model specific extensions? responseCollection = allStoppableAppsServiceGroup.stop(parameters).

Relationship between one thing and a collection of thingsOptions:

1. SG and Relationship are 2 things in 1.0 till resolved in RF in WSDM 2.02. Don’t use SG and use Collection relationship3. Do something in middle, use SG as it exists but require SG to expose collection relationships to its members.

Issue on Relationships – what is the relationship between service groups and relationships and is it messy

When we need a collection of things, we’ll use service groups unless it failsRegistry Capability in WSDM 1.0 -

Relationships

• Specification Review

• Issues Review and resolution– Dialects– Multiple Dialects– Simple query operations– Directionality– Standard relationship types?

• CIM Associations? UML?

Relationship Issues1. Scope of relationships: to non WS represented resources? To Any Resource? WS only (manageable or

not)? Only manageable resources?2. Do we need to allow multiple references for a participant3. Do we define the relationship related interface for a participant in the participant definition4. Name: Is ‘name’ metadata?, if keep it change its ‘tag’, 5. Identity of a relationship – is the identity the whole relationship?6. Finish definition of ‘Type’7. Internationalization of ‘name’8. Rename ‘ControlEndpoint’ tag to something less prescriptive9. Content of Particpant 10. Do we need to reference enclosure11. Do we need multiple references12. Dialects – (if not just manageable resources) do we do this, what are the mandatory ones?13. Create a relationship for MR w/ relationship registry for it?14. Queries –

1. Ability to get relationship data without endpoints2. Ability to get EPR for a known relationship3. Get relationshipByType – expand to get by relationship type and role type 4. Get related resources by type and role5. Give me all relationships for participant (passing in EPR)

15. Coordinate Properties for resource relationship WS-Resource as each own properties vs. one giant property. What is the intended use

16. Are RelationshipControlEndpoints to be a ‘Manageable Resource’ – implementing Identity?17. Can a Resource ALSO BE the relationship… can it BE MULTIPLE relationships… property collision?

Action Items: Continue Relationships calls – 4 calls – 2 hrs 1-3est – Fridays, Editor: Igor

Hibernated Relationship Issues

• Relationship type markup and declaration independent of relationship instance

• Allow a resource to declare the relationships it may participate in or must be a participant in

• GetRelationshipControlGroup – give me all managealbe relationships of this type – Service group w/ relationship markup and all relatoinships with eprs.

• Create a relationship for MR w/ relationship registry for it?

Relationship Conclusions• Will support n-ary• Be able to represent anything uml can model• All roles in a relationship are unique• Directionality is part of metadata on a relationship• Instead of ‘supported types’ its ‘CurrentTypes’ property and then move to

operation ‘are you involved in relationships of this type’ returning # of relationships of that type

• Relationships between– EPRs for any WS– Identity: MUWS:Identy– Name: xsd:any

Reference – wsa:endpointReferenceIs MUWS:identity inside of ‘name’‘Name’ isn’t liked by Igor

Issue: value of Name tag (igor does n’t like

MetaData• WSDM requirements (Done)

– Associate information with Properties, Operations, Notifications. • WSDM 0.5 tactical

– See metrics: Schema element attribute• WSRF requirement?

– Scope?– Timing?

• WSDM 1.0– What do WE do?– Add metadata content to specification – Heather/Homayoun/William/Warren/Andrea (Proposed)

• Type• Instance

– Rendering • Interim general• Interim capability specific/baked into schema• None for 1.0• Revisit rendering decision when there’s a ws-rf metadata doc if its by Sept something

• ActionItem: Heather run a few calls to add proposed metadata content thru existing MUWS capabilities Done

• Hal: r/w – changeable, constant• Metadata models in the world for properties – cim metric models w/ metadata as input Done• Tom will send url of position paper when there is one in WS-RF Done

Notifications

• Requirements to WS-Notification (Done)• Selecting notification technology for WSDM to be

dependent on (Done)– WS-Notification – OASIS TC with messaging and mgmt industry

participants– WS-Eventing – MS/partners specification– Other candidates?

• AI: Requirement on WS-N to define a content filter on the returned event (only subset of information in message). (Done)

• Put a note about get all data of messages performance impact, don’t do something in WSDM in the interim (Done)

Event Formats

• CBE as a starting point?

• Proposing a slightly re-factored CBE to start with

• Adding CBE semantics to CIM

• Continuing this work…subgroup?

Taxonomies

• Igor’s Proposal• Issues

– Forest: No sharing, no cycles– Some categories may be a graph w/o cycles (multiple

inheritance)– Relationships to owl and rdf? (requires new parser)

• Warren looked at OWL and RDF – probably too heavy to do this

– Is this a general problem or a management problem– Like UML Stereotype– Pick one? #5– Any alternatives/objections by next TC call (next week)

Request Processing State

• Issues• Message content selection for events (Done)• AI: Operational state change will need a State

Change Event; which OperationalStateChange can extend and RequestProcessingState change can extend (Done)

• AI: Investigate adding provider context in request processing notification (Done)

Resurrections

• Metrics– Types– Groups– Meta information– Notifications

• State– State model(s)– Meta information– Notifications

Discovery

• Discovery – – Status on Disc01-Disc09– Wrap up outstanding hibernated discovery

discussions – William – Correlateable names – Igor/Andrea (Disc05)

(Done)– Manageability capabilities – Heather

(Disc06/Disc07) (Proposed)– Registries – William (Disc09) (Proposed)

WSDM Requirement to WS-RF

• Finding the EPR of a WS-Resource from WSDL (Done)

Current proposed wording:

Planning

• Action Items– Pre-existing– From this meeting

• Outstanding work items– What needs to be accomplished for our specification

• Any new subgroups? • Specification Planning

– Dates?• Next F2F Planning

– When and where• Early Oct in ? Europe?