Scott Hollenbeck | 6 Oct 21:51 2005
Picon

Working Group Progress


Earlier today I had a chance to speak with Rik Drummond, EDIINT working
group chair.  We discussed the future of this group given that there has
been no evidence of activity on this mailing list for quite some time.  If
work is being done it's not being done here, and that's a problem.

Earlier this year, Rik and I discussed a charter update which included
submission of the AS3 document to the IESG by December 2005.  In our
conversation today Rik and I came to an agreement that your progress on this
document will determine if the group continues or not.  That is, if the
milestone is not met the group WILL be closed as a result of inactivity and
this missed milestone unless there are some really extenuating
circumstances.

Normally, one missed milestone isn't a big deal.  However, the lack of
participation in this group has me deeply concerned.  IETF standards require
evidence of community consensus; they can't happen if there's no community
or no consensus.  You, the members of this working group, must demonstrate
that both exist, and to meet your December deadline you really need to start
wrapping things up NOW.

Let's get this work finished!

-Scott-
EDIINT Area Advisor

Dale Moberg | 21 Oct 18:13 2005

Moving AS3 forward.

Hi

 

It seems to me that AS3 draft is pretty stable. Is there anyone on the list that either

 

1. has concerns about it moving forward

 

or

 

2. would like to see it be moved forward in the standards process?

 

If you are an implementer or just an interested party, please post a message to the list concerning your position on this. We need to get some indication of the groups’s consensus on this in the record.

 

We can then lobby Rik D.

 

Thanks

Debra Petta | 21 Oct 18:27 2005

RE: Moving AS3 forward.

I'd like to see it moved forward in the standards process.
 
We've all put a lot of development and testing efforts into our AS3 products
and it would be nice to see some market acceptance for AS3.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org [mailto:owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org]On Behalf Of Dale Moberg
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 11:13 AM
To: ietf-ediint <at> imc.org
Subject: Moving AS3 forward.

Hi

 

It seems to me that AS3 draft is pretty stable. Is there anyone on the list that either

 

1. has concerns about it moving forward

 

or

 

2. would like to see it be moved forward in the standards process?

 

If you are an implementer or just an interested party, please post a message to the list concerning your position on this. We need to get some indication of the groups’s consensus on this in the record.

 

We can then lobby Rik D.

 

Thanks

Andy Merrill | 21 Oct 18:41 2005

RE: Moving AS3 forward.

We would like to see the standard move forward.  We have customers looking at moving to AS3 in the next year.
 
Andy

From: owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org [mailto:owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org] On Behalf Of Dale Moberg
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 9:13 AM
To: ietf-ediint <at> imc.org
Subject: Moving AS3 forward.

Hi

 

It seems to me that AS3 draft is pretty stable. Is there anyone on the list that either

 

1. has concerns about it moving forward

 

or

 

2. would like to see it be moved forward in the standards process?

 

If you are an implementer or just an interested party, please post a message to the list concerning your position on this. We need to get some indication of the groups’s consensus on this in the record.

 

We can then lobby Rik D.

 

Thanks

Colombier Guillaume | 21 Oct 18:53 2005

RE: Moving AS3 forward.

Hi,
 
Following the AS3 certification this year,  and especially our last conference call, I've been in touch with Terry
Harding to discuss scenarios that were part of the certification process but that, according to me, were not
detailed engough in the draft  (hosting,  not hosting the FTP server etc...).
I know that this is not directly linked to AS3 messages format but more to the binding with FTP, however I think
that this should be addressed in the standard which must be exhaustive enough for somebody implementing
AS3 to sucessfully go through the certification. This is my point and I would be very pleased to discuss this
with the group.
I know that Terry had worked on it but I don't know if he had time to publish a new draft (I haven't received any new
document through the e-list).
 
 By the way, I agree with Debra, we've all put a lot of development and testing effort into our product for the AS3
support and I'd like to see it moved forward in the standard process. 
 

________________________________

-----Message d'origine-----
De : owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org [mailto:owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org]De la part de Debra Petta
Envoyé : vendredi 21 octobre 2005 18:27
À : ietf-ediint <at> imc.org
Cc : Dale Moberg
Objet : RE: Moving AS3 forward.

I'd like to see it moved forward in the standards process.
 
We've all put a lot of development and testing efforts into our AS3 products
and it would be nice to see some market acceptance for AS3.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org [mailto:owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org]On Behalf Of Dale Moberg
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 11:13 AM
To: ietf-ediint <at> imc.org
Subject: Moving AS3 forward.

Hi

 

It seems to me that AS3 draft is pretty stable. Is there anyone on the list that either

 

1. has concerns about it moving forward

 

or

 

2. would like to see it be moved forward in the standards process?

 

If you are an implementer or just an interested party, please post a message to the list concerning your position on this. We need to get some indication of the groups’s consensus on this in the record.

 

We can then lobby Rik D.

 

Thanks

Andersson Tony | 21 Oct 18:52 2005

RE: Moving AS3 forward.

I second that.
 
Tony Andersson
A x w a y.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org [mailto:owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org]On Behalf Of Debra Petta
Sent: 21 October 2005 17:27
To: ietf-ediint <at> imc.org
Cc: Dale Moberg
Subject: RE: Moving AS3 forward.

I'd like to see it moved forward in the standards process.
 
We've all put a lot of development and testing efforts into our AS3 products
and it would be nice to see some market acceptance for AS3.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org [mailto:owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org]On Behalf Of Dale Moberg
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 11:13 AM
To: ietf-ediint <at> imc.org
Subject: Moving AS3 forward.

Hi

 

It seems to me that AS3 draft is pretty stable. Is there anyone on the list that either

 

1. has concerns about it moving forward

 

or

 

2. would like to see it be moved forward in the standards process?

 

If you are an implementer or just an interested party, please post a message to the list concerning your position on this. We need to get some indication of the groups’s consensus on this in the record.

 

We can then lobby Rik D.

 

Thanks

Scott Hollenbeck | 21 Oct 19:13 2005
Picon

RE: Moving AS3 forward.


Speaking as your Area Director, and referencing this message:

http://www.imc.org/ietf-ediint/mail-archive/msg01777.html

I am glad to finally see some discussion on this mailing list.  However, you
all need to be aware that simple statements of "I support moving this
forward" aren't sufficient to develop standards in the IETF.  You need to
actually do the design work on this working group mailing list, too!

I was encouraged to see the message from Guillaume Colombier describing a
potential technical issue.  Whether or not this document moves forward
depends on how you all deal with comments like that one.  If you discuss it
here and decide on a solution here I may consider a working group request
for publication as a proposed standard.  If nothing happens here I can tell
you right now that I will not support a request to publish AS3 as a Proposed
Standard.  The best I will be able to do is to consider publication as an
Informational RFC documenting the work of some organization that took place
outside the IETF.

Remember, IETF standards MUST be developed in the IETF.

-Scott-


Terry Harding | 21 Oct 19:12 2005

RE: Moving AS3 forward.

Here are the additional changes I am recommending to the AS3 draft to support your request for better

clarity to the spec. 

 

Lets start our discussions here.  Please respond to the list.

 

Thanks

 

Terry Harding

Cyclone Commerce Inc.

 

7.2  Message Disposition Notifications (MDN)

 

   The AS3-MDNs are returned on a separate FTP TCP/IP

   connection and are a response to an AS3 message.

  

   The following diagram illustrates the delivery of an

   AS3-MDN delivery:

      

          AS3-MDN

         [S] ----( connect )----> [R]   [FTP Server]

         [S] ----( send )-------> [R]   [AS3-Message]

         [S] ----( disconnect )-> [R]   [FTP Server]

 

         [S] <---( connect )----- [R]   [FTP Server]

         [S] <---( send )-------- [R]   [AS3-MDN]]

         [S] <---( disconnect )-- [R]   [FTP Server]

 

    Note:  Refer to Section 7.4.4 for additional

           programming notes.

 

 

7.4.4  Additional AS3-MDN Programming Notes

 

    9.  An AS3 implementation MUST present to its trading partners

        an ftp compliant server interface where inbound documents

        and mdns are received.

 

   10.  An AS3 implementation MUST be able to retrieve inbound

        messages from it's currently configured ftp server interface. 

 

   Note: Programming Notes 9 and 10 do not imply any specific method

         for supplying the ftp server interface. But, does allow for

         several different types of implementations.  Some vendors may

         choose to imbed an ftp compliant server interface within their 

         product and others may choose to utilize off-the-shelf ftp servers

         to supply the required ftp server interface. Some may choose to

         utilize hosting services provide by their trading partner or by a

         third party hosting service. Whichever method is utilized, an

         AS3 implementation MUST support rules 9 and 10.

 

    11.  AS3 implementations MAY imbed an ftp server interface within their

         product.

 

    12.  AS3 implementations MUST be configurable to allow the use of

         an external ftp hosting service.

 

    Note: An external ftp hosting service may be hosted by a third-party

          Or possibly hosted by your trading partner.

 

    13.  An AS3 implementation MUST be able to send business documents 

         and mdns to a trading partner's currently configured ftp server

         interface.

 

    14.  An AS3 implementation may imbed ftp client code into their product

         or use an third-party ftp client.

 

    15.  Example Configurations

  

         1. Peer to Peer

            TPA is using a local ftp server and TPB is using an imbedded ftp

 

            server.

 

         [A Client] ----( connect )----> [B Server]

         [A Client] ----( send )-------> [B Server] [AS3-Message]

         [A Client] ----( disconnect )-> [B Server]

 

         [A Server] <---( connect )----- [B Client]

         [A Server] <---( send )-------- [B Client] [AS3-MDN]]

         [A Server] <---( disconnect )-- [B Server]

         [A Client] <---( GET )--------- [A Server]            

 

         2. Third Party Hosting

            Both parties are using the same third-party hosted ftp server.

 

         [A Client] ----( connect )----> [Hosted Server]

         [A Client] ----( send )-------> [Hosted Server] [AS3-Message]

         [A Client] ----( disconnect )-> [Hosted Server]

         [Hosted Server]( GET )--------> [B Client]

 

         [Hosted Server] <---( connect )----- [B Client]

         [Hosted Server] <---( send )-------- [B Client] [AS3-MDN]]

         [Hosted Server] <---( disconnect )-- [B Client]

         [A Client]      <---( GET )--------- [Hosted Server]            

 

         3. Trading Partner Hosting

            TPA is using the imbedded ftp server hosted by TPB.

 

         [A Client] ----( connect )----> [B Server]

         [A Client] ----( send )-------> [B Server] [AS3-Message]

         [A Client] ----( disconnect )-> [B Server]

 

         [B Server] <---( connect )----- [B Client]

         [B Server] <---( send )-------- [B Client] [AS3-MDN]]

         [B Server] <---( disconnect )-- [B Client]

         [A Client] <---( GET )--------- [B Server] 

 

 

From: owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org [mailto:owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org] On Behalf Of Colombier Guillaume
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 9:54 AM
To: ietf-ediint <at> imc.org
Cc: Dale Moberg; Debra Petta
Subject: RE: Moving AS3 forward.

 

Hi,

 

Following the AS3 certification this year,  and especially our last conference call, I've been in touch with Terry
Harding to discuss scenarios that were part of the certification process but that, according to me, were not

detailed engough in the draft  (hosting,  not hosting the FTP server etc...).

I know that this is not directly linked to AS3 messages format but more to the binding with FTP, however I think

that this should be addressed in the standard which must be exhaustive enough for somebody implementing

AS3 to sucessfully go through the certification. This is my point and I would be very pleased to discuss this

with the group.

I know that Terry had worked on it but I don't know if he had time to publish a new draft (I haven't received any new

document through the e-list).

 

 By the way, I agree with Debra, we've all put a lot of development and testing effort into our product for the AS3

support and I'd like to see it moved forward in the standard process. 

 

________________________________

-----Message d'origine-----
De : owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org [mailto:owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org]De la part de Debra Petta
Envoyé : vendredi 21 octobre 2005 18:27
À : ietf-ediint <at> imc.org
Cc : Dale Moberg
Objet : RE: Moving AS3 forward.

I'd like to see it moved forward in the standards process.

 

We've all put a lot of development and testing efforts into our AS3 products

and it would be nice to see some market acceptance for AS3.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org [mailto:owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org]On Behalf Of Dale Moberg
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 11:13 AM
To: ietf-ediint <at> imc.org
Subject: Moving AS3 forward.

Hi

 

It seems to me that AS3 draft is pretty stable. Is there anyone on the list that either

 

1. has concerns about it moving forward

 

or

 

2. would like to see it be moved forward in the standards process?

 

If you are an implementer or just an interested party, please post a message to the list concerning your position on this. We need to get some indication of the groups’s consensus on this in the record.

 

We can then lobby Rik D.

 

Thanks

Terry Harding | 21 Oct 19:42 2005

AS3 Discusion - Abstract


Since the AS3 document has been discussed extensively off this list, I
will be submitting each individual section of the document for review
and comments. 

Please forward any suggestions of changes to the list.

*****************************
Abstract

  This Applicability Statement (AS) describes how to exchange structured
  business data securely using the File Transfer Protocol (FTP) for XML,
  Binary, Electronic Data Interchange (EDI - ANSI X12 or UN/EDIFACT), or
  other data used for business-to-business data interchange for which
  MIME packaging can be accomplished using standard MIME content-types.
  Authentication and data confidentiality are obtained by using
  Cryptographic Message Syntax (S/MIME) security body parts.
  Authenticated acknowledgements employ multipart/signed replies to the
  original message.

******************************

Thanks

Terry Harding
Cyclone Commerce Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org
[mailto:owner-ietf-ediint <at> mail.imc.org] On Behalf Of Scott Hollenbeck
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 10:13 AM
To: ietf-ediint <at> imc.org
Subject: RE: Moving AS3 forward.

Speaking as your Area Director, and referencing this message:

http://www.imc.org/ietf-ediint/mail-archive/msg01777.html

I am glad to finally see some discussion on this mailing list.  However,
you
all need to be aware that simple statements of "I support moving this
forward" aren't sufficient to develop standards in the IETF.  You need
to
actually do the design work on this working group mailing list, too!

I was encouraged to see the message from Guillaume Colombier describing
a
potential technical issue.  Whether or not this document moves forward
depends on how you all deal with comments like that one.  If you discuss
it
here and decide on a solution here I may consider a working group
request
for publication as a proposed standard.  If nothing happens here I can
tell
you right now that I will not support a request to publish AS3 as a
Proposed
Standard.  The best I will be able to do is to consider publication as
an
Informational RFC documenting the work of some organization that took
place
outside the IETF.

Remember, IETF standards MUST be developed in the IETF.

-Scott-


Terry Harding | 21 Oct 19:50 2005

AS3 Discusion - Introduction


Open for discussion

1.   Introduction

  Previous work on Internet EDI focused on specifying MIME content types
  for EDI data [2] and extending this work to support secure EC/EDI 
  transport over SMTP [5].  This document expands on RFC 1767 to specify
  a comprehensive set of data security features, specifically data 
  privacy, data integrity, authenticity, non-repudiation of origin and 
  non-repudiation of receipt over FTP.  This document also recognizes 
  contemporary RFCs and is attempting to "re-invent" as little as 
  possible. While this document focuses on EDI data, any other data type
  describable in a MIME format are also supported.  

  Internet MIME based EDI can be accomplished by using and complying 
  with the following RFC's and Internet drafts:

         -RFC 959  File Transfer Protocol 
         -RFC 2228 FTP Security Extensions
         -RFC 1767 EDI Content Type
         -RFC 3023 XML Media Types
         -RFC 1847 Security Multiparts for MIME
         -RFC 1892 Multipart/Report
         -RFC 2045 to 2049 MIME RFC's
         -RFC 2298 Message Disposition Notification
         -RFC 2630, 2632, 2633: S/MIME v3 Specifications
         -RFC 3274 Compressed Data Content for Cryptographic Message
                   Syntax
         -draft-ietf-ediint-compression-02.txt

  Our intent here is to define clearly and precisely how these are used 
  together, and what is required by user agents to be compliant with
  this document.

  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL   NOT",
  "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and  "OPTIONAL" in this 
  document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.
*****************************************************

Terry Harding
Cyclone Commerce Inc.


Gmane