Hello: Karl Czajkowski wrote:
Jim has kindly posted version 12 of the draft, including comments and revisions by me. The comments emphasize my concerns about the existing presentation and content of some sections.
The revisions attempt to add the extensibility needed for Jon's signature problem (without actually defining any signature-related syntax) and the "async" interfaces. I also removed the Terminate operation.
While I do agree that the lifecycle of a generic service agreement could last much longer than the service itself, I am a bit uncomfortable with Agreement as defined in the WS-Agreement would last much longer after the service itself has terminated because of resource problems (like a malloc without explicit free-ing (I am afraid I am used to c-style rather than java style programming..) Would it be possible to specify terminate/expiration of Agreement after the service has finished and leave the rest of the SLA / accounting etc problems to logging services? Best Regards Toshi
I am sure there are presentation problems and inconsistencies, but hopefully this is a more concrete basis for further discussion of these proposed changes.
Please ignore the appendix entirely. The main sections are intended to be normative and the appendix is unknown older content that I did not touch.
karl
https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/graap-wg/document/WS-AgreementSpecifica...
-- Toshiyuki Nakata t-nakata@cw.jp.nec.com +81-44-431-7653 (NEC Internal 8-22-60210)