You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@santuario.apache.org by Christian Geuer-Pollmann <ge...@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de> on 2003/01/28 23:54:47 UTC

Objection on movement from xml-security to ws-security

Hi dims, 
hi all,

during the last weeks, my mind was focussed on other things than what's
going on at the xml-security project. So I didn't realize that the creation
of the WS-PMC included that the XML-Security Project from xml.apache.org
became a ws-security project under the ws.apache.org umbrella. 

Well, the mail from RL 'Bob' Morgan on OpenSAML and WS-SSO-Marketing issues
woke me up and I refuse to move XML-Security away from the xml.apache.org
umbrella for the following reasons:

The Apache XML-Security project implements 

- W3C Canonical XML, 
- W3C Exclusive XML Canonicalization, 
- W3C XML Signature, 
- W3C XML-Signature XPath Filter 2.0
- parts of W3C XML Encryption

and with the contribution from Axl, we have full Encryption support. These
are all *W3C* specs which do not directly relate to SOAP or WebServices.
Yes, SOAP-Signature and MS/IBM-WS-Security do define bindings for Signature
and Encryption, but Signature and Encryption can be used (and in fact *are*
used) independently from WS-Security. These are generic XML toolkits, not
WS toolkits. Like XML-Parsers and XPath processors are, too. 

So I kindly ask *not* to move XML-Security to ws.apache.org. All this goes
absolutely too fast and without time to think about it. 

Kind regards,
Christian 

geuerp@apache.org

Re: Objection on movement from xml-security to ws-security

Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Christian Geuer-Pollmann wrote:
> 
> So I kindly ask *not* to move XML-Security to ws.apache.org. All this goes
> absolutely too fast and without time to think about it. 

At this point, the board resolution has passed.  It will require a 
resolution to move it back.  Should such a resolution be presented to 
the board - with the backing of the existing committers to the 
xml-security codebase - then I would likely vote for it.

- Sam Ruby



Re: Objection on movement from xml-security to ws-security

Posted by James M Snell <ja...@us.ibm.com>.
When I first saw XML-Security on the list of projects for the WS PMC I, 
too, felt that it was a bit wierd but didn't say anything under the 
assumption that the XML-Security project members had been aware of it and 
had approved of the move.  Perhaps this one should be reconsidered?

- James Snell
     IBM Emerging Technologies
     jasnell@us.ibm.com
     (559) 587-1233 (office)
     (700) 544-9035 (t/l)
     Programming Web Services With SOAP
         O'Reilly & Associates, ISBN 0596000952

     Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. 
     Do not be terrified, do not be discouraged, for the Lord your 
     God will be with you whereever you go.    - Joshua 1:9



Daniel Rall <dl...@collab.net>
01/28/2003 03:22 PM
Please respond to pmc


To
Christian Geuer-Pollmann <ge...@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de>
cc
Davanum Srinivas <di...@yahoo.com>, <pm...@ws.apache.org>, 
<pm...@xml.apache.org>, <in...@apache.org>, 
<se...@xml.apache.org>
bcc

Subject
Re: Objection on movement from xml-security to ws-security



On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Christian Geuer-Pollmann wrote:

> during the last weeks, my mind was focussed on other things than what's
> going on at the xml-security project. So I didn't realize that the 
creation
> of the WS-PMC included that the XML-Security Project from xml.apache.org
> became a ws-security project under the ws.apache.org umbrella.
>
> Well, the mail from RL 'Bob' Morgan on OpenSAML and WS-SSO-Marketing 
issues
> woke me up and I refuse to move XML-Security away from the 
xml.apache.org
> umbrella for the following reasons:
>
> The Apache XML-Security project implements
>
> - W3C Canonical XML,
> - W3C Exclusive XML Canonicalization,
> - W3C XML Signature,
> - W3C XML-Signature XPath Filter 2.0
> - parts of W3C XML Encryption
>
> and with the contribution from Axl, we have full Encryption support. 
These
> are all *W3C* specs which do not directly relate to SOAP or WebServices.
> Yes, SOAP-Signature and MS/IBM-WS-Security do define bindings for 
Signature
> and Encryption, but Signature and Encryption can be used (and in fact 
*are*
> used) independently from WS-Security. These are generic XML toolkits, 
not
> WS toolkits. Like XML-Parsers and XPath processors are, too.
>
> So I kindly ask *not* to move XML-Security to ws.apache.org. All this 
goes
> absolutely too fast and without time to think about it.

There is a lot of synergy between web services and XML -- most of today's
popular web service technologies (e.g. SOAP, XML-RPC) are in fact built on
top of XML.  The fact that this synergy exists and will continue to grow 
in
the future doesn't make XML security in and of itself a web service, even 
if
it is a core technology used by protocols and projects implementing web
services.  I support Christian's position of wanting to stay part of the 
XML
project, but request that he ask the XML security committers what they 
think
before any further action is pursued.

- Dan




Re: Objection on movement from xml-security to ws-security

Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@collab.net>.
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Christian Geuer-Pollmann wrote:

> during the last weeks, my mind was focussed on other things than what's
> going on at the xml-security project. So I didn't realize that the creation
> of the WS-PMC included that the XML-Security Project from xml.apache.org
> became a ws-security project under the ws.apache.org umbrella. 
> 
> Well, the mail from RL 'Bob' Morgan on OpenSAML and WS-SSO-Marketing issues
> woke me up and I refuse to move XML-Security away from the xml.apache.org
> umbrella for the following reasons:
> 
> The Apache XML-Security project implements 
> 
> - W3C Canonical XML, 
> - W3C Exclusive XML Canonicalization, 
> - W3C XML Signature, 
> - W3C XML-Signature XPath Filter 2.0
> - parts of W3C XML Encryption
> 
> and with the contribution from Axl, we have full Encryption support. These
> are all *W3C* specs which do not directly relate to SOAP or WebServices.
> Yes, SOAP-Signature and MS/IBM-WS-Security do define bindings for Signature
> and Encryption, but Signature and Encryption can be used (and in fact *are*
> used) independently from WS-Security. These are generic XML toolkits, not
> WS toolkits. Like XML-Parsers and XPath processors are, too. 
> 
> So I kindly ask *not* to move XML-Security to ws.apache.org. All this goes
> absolutely too fast and without time to think about it. 

There is a lot of synergy between web services and XML -- most of today's
popular web service technologies (e.g. SOAP, XML-RPC) are in fact built on
top of XML.  The fact that this synergy exists and will continue to grow in
the future doesn't make XML security in and of itself a web service, even if
it is a core technology used by protocols and projects implementing web
services.  I support Christian's position of wanting to stay part of the XML
project, but request that he ask the XML security committers what they think
before any further action is pursued.

- Dan



Re: Objection on movement from xml-security to ws-security

Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 05:42:10PM -0800, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> ok. Let's leave things as-is (cvs, mailing lists etc). We can ask the Apache board to move back
> XML-Security the way it was in the next meeting (don't know exactly when it is...Need to check
> with sam).

Febrary 19, 2003.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
gstein@apache.org ... ASF Chairman ... http://www.apache.org/

Re: Objection on movement from xml-security to ws-security

Posted by Davanum Srinivas <di...@yahoo.com>.
ok. Let's leave things as-is (cvs, mailing lists etc). We can ask the Apache board to move back
XML-Security the way it was in the next meeting (don't know exactly when it is...Need to check
with sam). 

FYI, Here's the email that was sent to all concerned projects
(http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-apache-general&m=104316088830105&w=2)

In the mean time, can you please hold a VOTE in security-dev just to make sure that this is what
you all want?

Thanks,
dims

--- Christian Geuer-Pollmann <ge...@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de> wrote:
> 
> No, it does not change my position. 
> 
> --On Dienstag, 28. Januar 2003 14:58 -0800 Davanum Srinivas
> <di...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > Christian,
> > 
> > The board has already approved the move. Moving Security project has
> > NOTHING to do with the OpenSAML proposal....Does that make any difference
> > to your position?  
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > dims
> > 
> > --- Christian Geuer-Pollmann <ge...@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de>
> > wrote:
> >> Hi dims, 
> >> hi all,
> >> 
> >> during the last weeks, my mind was focussed on other things than what's
> >> going on at the xml-security project. So I didn't realize that the
> >> creation of the WS-PMC included that the XML-Security Project from
> >> xml.apache.org became a ws-security project under the ws.apache.org
> >> umbrella. 
> >> 
> >> Well, the mail from RL 'Bob' Morgan on OpenSAML and WS-SSO-Marketing
> >> issues woke me up and I refuse to move XML-Security away from the
> >> xml.apache.org umbrella for the following reasons:
> >> 
> >> The Apache XML-Security project implements 
> >> 
> >> - W3C Canonical XML, 
> >> - W3C Exclusive XML Canonicalization, 
> >> - W3C XML Signature, 
> >> - W3C XML-Signature XPath Filter 2.0
> >> - parts of W3C XML Encryption
> >> 
> >> and with the contribution from Axl, we have full Encryption support.
> >> These are all *W3C* specs which do not directly relate to SOAP or
> >> WebServices. Yes, SOAP-Signature and MS/IBM-WS-Security do define
> >> bindings for Signature and Encryption, but Signature and Encryption can
> >> be used (and in fact *are* used) independently from WS-Security. These
> >> are generic XML toolkits, not WS toolkits. Like XML-Parsers and XPath
> >> processors are, too. 
> >> 
> >> So I kindly ask *not* to move XML-Security to ws.apache.org. All this
> >> goes absolutely too fast and without time to think about it. 
> >> 
> >> Kind regards,
> >> Christian 
> >> 
> >> geuerp@apache.org
> > Davanum Srinivas - http://xml.apache.org/~dims/
> 


=====
Davanum Srinivas - http://xml.apache.org/~dims/

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Re: Objection on movement from xml-security to ws-security

Posted by Christian Geuer-Pollmann <ge...@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de>.
No, it does not change my position. 

--On Dienstag, 28. Januar 2003 14:58 -0800 Davanum Srinivas
<di...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Christian,
> 
> The board has already approved the move. Moving Security project has
> NOTHING to do with the OpenSAML proposal....Does that make any difference
> to your position?  
> 
> Thanks,
> dims
> 
> --- Christian Geuer-Pollmann <ge...@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de>
> wrote:
>> Hi dims, 
>> hi all,
>> 
>> during the last weeks, my mind was focussed on other things than what's
>> going on at the xml-security project. So I didn't realize that the
>> creation of the WS-PMC included that the XML-Security Project from
>> xml.apache.org became a ws-security project under the ws.apache.org
>> umbrella. 
>> 
>> Well, the mail from RL 'Bob' Morgan on OpenSAML and WS-SSO-Marketing
>> issues woke me up and I refuse to move XML-Security away from the
>> xml.apache.org umbrella for the following reasons:
>> 
>> The Apache XML-Security project implements 
>> 
>> - W3C Canonical XML, 
>> - W3C Exclusive XML Canonicalization, 
>> - W3C XML Signature, 
>> - W3C XML-Signature XPath Filter 2.0
>> - parts of W3C XML Encryption
>> 
>> and with the contribution from Axl, we have full Encryption support.
>> These are all *W3C* specs which do not directly relate to SOAP or
>> WebServices. Yes, SOAP-Signature and MS/IBM-WS-Security do define
>> bindings for Signature and Encryption, but Signature and Encryption can
>> be used (and in fact *are* used) independently from WS-Security. These
>> are generic XML toolkits, not WS toolkits. Like XML-Parsers and XPath
>> processors are, too. 
>> 
>> So I kindly ask *not* to move XML-Security to ws.apache.org. All this
>> goes absolutely too fast and without time to think about it. 
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> Christian 
>> 
>> geuerp@apache.org
> Davanum Srinivas - http://xml.apache.org/~dims/


Re: Objection on movement from xml-security to ws-security

Posted by Davanum Srinivas <di...@yahoo.com>.
Christian,

The board has already approved the move. Moving Security project has NOTHING to do with the
OpenSAML proposal....Does that make any difference to your position?  

Thanks,
dims

--- Christian Geuer-Pollmann <ge...@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de> wrote:
> Hi dims, 
> hi all,
> 
> during the last weeks, my mind was focussed on other things than what's
> going on at the xml-security project. So I didn't realize that the creation
> of the WS-PMC included that the XML-Security Project from xml.apache.org
> became a ws-security project under the ws.apache.org umbrella. 
> 
> Well, the mail from RL 'Bob' Morgan on OpenSAML and WS-SSO-Marketing issues
> woke me up and I refuse to move XML-Security away from the xml.apache.org
> umbrella for the following reasons:
> 
> The Apache XML-Security project implements 
> 
> - W3C Canonical XML, 
> - W3C Exclusive XML Canonicalization, 
> - W3C XML Signature, 
> - W3C XML-Signature XPath Filter 2.0
> - parts of W3C XML Encryption
> 
> and with the contribution from Axl, we have full Encryption support. These
> are all *W3C* specs which do not directly relate to SOAP or WebServices.
> Yes, SOAP-Signature and MS/IBM-WS-Security do define bindings for Signature
> and Encryption, but Signature and Encryption can be used (and in fact *are*
> used) independently from WS-Security. These are generic XML toolkits, not
> WS toolkits. Like XML-Parsers and XPath processors are, too. 
> 
> So I kindly ask *not* to move XML-Security to ws.apache.org. All this goes
> absolutely too fast and without time to think about it. 
> 
> Kind regards,
> Christian 
> 
> geuerp@apache.org


=====
Davanum Srinivas - http://xml.apache.org/~dims/

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com