PSTC F2F#4

1. PSTC F2F#4 February 11th & 12th 2003

2. 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

3. 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

4. Admin • Vote to accept minutes of committee meeting January 20th 2003 • Vote to accept minutes of committee meeting February 3rd 2003

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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!

8. 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”

9. Burton Catalysts Proposal • Interop commitment • Requires eight committed participants • So far we have:

10. Burton Catalysts Proposal • Demo scenario Vendor PSP Vendor PST Vendor PSP Common RA Vendor PSP Vendor PST Vendor PSP

11. 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

12. Time Line & Project Plan For submitting 1.0 specification

13. 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 F2F #4 Burton decision Submission Detailed inter-op plan Acceptance Pre-inter-op test Catalyst

14. Project Plan

15. Project Plan

16. Core Operations Review

17. Core Operations • Review • Approve • Thoughts on normative text

18. Request / Response Review

19. Request / Response • Review • Approve • Thoughts on normative text

20. ExtendedRequest Discussion & Review

21. ExtendedRequest • Review revised schema • Resolve ProvID issue • Approve • Discuss extensibility section of specification • Normative text on use of ExtendedRequest • Example • Define lead for above

22. Query Schema Discussion & Planning

23. Query Schema • Status • Model • 1.0 time line and criticality for interoperability

24. Bindings Discussion & Planning

25. 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?

26. Specification

27. 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

28. 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

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

30. Next Steps Action items review