WS Protocol Workshop Process The path to interoperable Web Services specifications Jorgen Thelin, Microsoft Corporation

Workshops – The Path to Interoperable Specs Purpose: Applying software testing practices to Web Services specs Provide review, testing and validation of WS-* specifications earlier in the spec development cycle Goal: INTEROPERABLE SPECS Find and fix problems in the specs before they are widely implemented and adopted Gather feedback from implementers, vendors and other interested parties on spec interoperability and usability problems Demonstrate and test of the interoperability achievable using the spec(s) Result: Community consultation and involvement in the spec development process Proven interoperability among spec implementations

Purpose:

Applying software testing practices to Web Services specs

Provide review, testing and validation of WS-* specifications earlier in the spec development cycle

Goal: INTEROPERABLE SPECS

Find and fix problems in the specs before they are widely implemented and adopted

Gather feedback from implementers, vendors and other interested parties on spec interoperability and usability problems

Demonstrate and test of the interoperability achievable using the spec(s)

Result:

Community consultation and involvement in the spec development process

Proven interoperability among spec implementations

Workshops - Attendance Open to EVERYONE Anyone who signs a feedback agreement can: Attend feedback or interop workshop Post to workshop mailing lists For example Spec authors Companies with known interest in the spec Authors of competing specs, if they wish Researchers / University staff

Open to EVERYONE

Anyone who signs a feedback agreement can:

Attend feedback or interop workshop

Post to workshop mailing lists

For example

Spec authors

Companies with known interest in the spec

Authors of competing specs, if they wish

Researchers / University staff

Types of Workshop Feedback Workshop Gather comments from implementers and interested parties Equivalent to: Code review / walkthrough Interop Workshop Exercise spec implementations Equivalent to: System / integration testing for software

Feedback Workshop

Gather comments from implementers and interested parties

Equivalent to: Code review / walkthrough

Interop Workshop

Exercise spec implementations

Equivalent to: System / integration testing for software

Specification State Transitions Interop Draft Author Draft Move to standards org for ratification Workshop Pipeline Spec States Published Consultation Draft Interop Draft Interop Scenarios Feedback Workshops Interop Workshops

Compare With: Software Development State Transitions WIP Code External Release Review / Test Pipeline Software States Committed Code Test Cases Code Review System and Integration Testing Internal Milestone Release

Feedback Workshop Details Audience: all interested parties Just sign the feedback agreement Goal: Gathering feedback on published drafts Format - 1-day event Presentations for half a day Feedback discussion for half a day Deliverables Feedback to spec authors Suggestions for future interop scenarios

Audience: all interested parties

Just sign the feedback agreement

Goal: Gathering feedback on published drafts

Format - 1-day event

Presentations for half a day

Feedback discussion for half a day

Deliverables

Feedback to spec authors

Suggestions for future interop scenarios

Interop Workshop Details Audience: spec implementers Sign the feedback agreement and bring your own implementation Goal: Achieving interoperability between implementations Format - 2-day event Round-table interoperability lab - 1 room, many implementations Hands-on peer-to-peer testing - BYO Laptop Test cases created in advance – included in invite pack Deliverables Feedback to spec authors on implementability of spec(s) Broad levels of interoperability between implementations Suggestions for future interop scenarios (If possible) Live endpoints from ongoing testing

Audience: spec implementers

Sign the feedback agreement and bring your own implementation

Goal: Achieving interoperability between implementations

Format - 2-day event

Round-table interoperability lab - 1 room, many implementations

Hands-on peer-to-peer testing - BYO Laptop

Test cases created in advance – included in invite pack

Deliverables

Feedback to spec authors on implementability of spec(s)

Broad levels of interoperability between implementations

Suggestions for future interop scenarios

(If possible) Live endpoints from ongoing testing

Workshop Tracks WS-Discovery, Device Profile for WS Devices WS-Eventing Eventing WS-Coordination, WS-AtomicTransaction, WS-BusinessActivity Transactions WS-Addressing, WS-Policy, WS-PolicyAttachment Infrastructure / Metadata WS-Security, WS-Trust, WS-SecureConversation, WS-SecurityPolicy, Security Kerberos Binding, WS-Federation, WS-Federation Active and Passive Client Profiles Security WS-ReliableMessaging Reliable Messaging Specs Track

Workshop History Feedback Workshops Policy + Security (Trust) – Feb 2003 Policy + Security (Trust) – March 2003 Reliable Messaging – July 2003 Security (Federation) – Nov 2003 Eventing – Feb 2004 Transactions – Mar 2004 WS-Discovery – May 2004 Interop Workshops Reliable Messaging – Oct 2003 Security (Secure Conv and Trust) – Nov 2003 Security (Federation Passive Profile) – March 2004 Eventing – Apr 2004 Reliable Messaging – May 2004

Feedback Workshops

Policy + Security (Trust) – Feb 2003

Policy + Security (Trust) – March 2003

Reliable Messaging – July 2003

Security (Federation) – Nov 2003

Eventing – Feb 2004

Transactions – Mar 2004

WS-Discovery – May 2004

Interop Workshops

Reliable Messaging – Oct 2003

Security (Secure Conv and Trust) – Nov 2003

Security (Federation Passive Profile) – March 2004

Eventing – Apr 2004

Reliable Messaging – May 2004

Why the incremental approach? Rome wasn’t built in a day Neither was the Internet, or any major IT infrastructure! Specs take time to settle in and usage experiences develop Building the higher layers of the architecture can point out changes required in lower levels For example: HTML didn’t jump straight to v4.0 – it took time to see what worked and what didn’t

Rome wasn’t built in a day

Neither was the Internet, or any major IT infrastructure!

Specs take time to settle in and usage experiences develop

Building the higher layers of the architecture can point out changes required in lower levels

For example: HTML didn’t jump straight to v4.0 – it took time to see what worked and what didn’t

Workshops – More Info Workshops Home Page on MSDN http://msdn.microsoft.com/webservices/community/workshops/ Workshops Home Page on IBM developerWorks http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/offers/WS-Specworkshops/

Workshops Home Page on MSDN

http://msdn.microsoft.com/webservices/community/workshops/

Workshops Home Page on IBM developerWorks

http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/offers/WS-Specworkshops/

Workshops – More Info Workshops Home Page on MSDN http:// msdn.microsoft.com /webservices/community/workshops/

Workshops Home Page on MSDN

http:// msdn.microsoft.com /webservices/community/workshops/

Ways to get involved Visit Workshop web pages for more info Join the workshop discussion groups on Yahoo WS-RM-Workshops WS-Security-Workshops WS-TX-Workshops WS-Eventing-Workshops WS-Discovery-Workshops Come to future Feedback and/or Interop Workshops and give us your input

Visit Workshop web pages for more info

Join the workshop discussion groups on Yahoo

WS-RM-Workshops

WS-Security-Workshops

WS-TX-Workshops

WS-Eventing-Workshops

WS-Discovery-Workshops

Come to future Feedback and/or Interop Workshops and give us your input