Issue 7167: Discrepancy in the changes proposed to CSIIOP and CSI modules (firewall-traversal-ftf) Source: Hewlett-Packard (Dr. Jishnu Mukerji, jishnu(at)hp.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: There seems to be a discrepancy in the changes proposed to CSIIOP and CSI modules. The draft document has identical changes to both. I think the intent of the Errata was to have only one, just switch them from CSIIOP to CSI. However, Brian's convience document doesn't show the change. Now, the draft document ptc/2004-01-01 that we are voting on has both. What to do? Should that be represented by another document, namely CSI, with it's changes, just like 2004-01-02 is? Cheers, -Polar Yeah, I see the problem. Yet another consequence of the adopted spec changing existing spec without calling out the change in the section meant to identify changes to existing specs. So it looks like the fix involves: 1. Section 1.9.2 and 1.9.3 in ptc/04-01-01 [henceforth referred to as document A] should disappear. 2. The first half of section of document A starting from the second para of the section and upto and including the last but one paragraph on page 1-20, should be appended to Section 24.2.5 "Identity Token Format" of Chapter 24 of Core with the title (that is the CSIv2 Chapter)[henceforth referred to as document B]. Also append a row to table 24-2 with info about ITTCompundToken. 3. The IDL in section 1.9.3 of document A should be merged properly into the IDL for the CSI module that appears in section 24.9.2 document B. 4. The addition to CSIIOP IDL as it appears in Section 1.5.2 of document A should be merged appropriately into the IDL for CSIIOP in section 24.9.3 of document B. 5. In document B insert a section 24.5.1.6 "TAG_IIOP_SEC_TRANS" with a two liner explanation of what this tag is together with the IDL for it from section 1.5.2 of document A. I'd suggest that we file this as an issue and resolve it in the FTF roughly along the lines suggested above. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: March 19, 2004: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== te: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 11:29:27 -0500 From: Jishnu Mukerji Organization: Hewlett-Packard SGBU/MSO User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Juergen Boldt Cc: "Bergersen, Rebecca" Subject: [Fwd: Re: Firewall Traversal FTF Vote 1 on Final Adopted Spec] Juergen, Please file this as a Firewall FTF issue. Thanks, Jishnu. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Firewall Traversal FTF Vote 1 on Final Adopted Spec Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 17:42:00 -0500 From: Jishnu Mukerji Organization: Hewlett-Packard SGBU/MSO To: firewall-traversal-ftf@omg.org CC: Polar Humenn References: Polar Humenn wrote: There seems to be a discrepancy in the changes proposed to CSIIOP and CSI modules. The draft document has identical changes to both. I think the intent of the Errata was to have only one, just switch them from CSIIOP to CSI. However, Brian's convience document doesn't show the change. Now, the draft document ptc/2004-01-01 that we are voting on has both. What to do? Should that be represented by another document, namely CSI, with it's changes, just like 2004-01-02 is? Cheers, -Polar Yeah, I see the problem. Yet another consequence of the adopted spec changing existing spec without calling out the change in the section meant to identify changes to existing specs. :-( So it looks like the fix involves: 1. Section 1.9.2 and 1.9.3 in ptc/04-01-01 [henceforth referred to as document A] should disappear. 2. The first half of section of document A starting from the second para of the section and upto and including the last but one paragraph on page 1-20, should be appended to Section 24.2.5 "Identity Token Format" of Chapter 24 of Core with the title (that is the CSIv2 Chapter)[henceforth referred to as document B]. Also append a row to table 24-2 with info about ITTCompundToken. 3. The IDL in section 1.9.3 of document A should be merged properly into the IDL for the CSI module that appears in section 24.9.2 document B. 4. The addition to CSIIOP IDL as it appears in Section 1.5.2 of document A should be merged appropriately into the IDL for CSIIOP in section 24.9.3 of document B. 5. In document B insert a section 24.5.1.6 "TAG_IIOP_SEC_TRANS" with a two liner explanation of what this tag is together with the IDL for it from section 1.5.2 of document A. I'd suggest that we file this as an issue and resolve it in the FTF roughly along the lines suggested above. Jishnu. -- Jishnu Mukerji Senior Systems Architect 1001 Frontier Road, Suite 300 Technology Office Bridgewater NJ 08807, USA Management Software Organization Tel: +1 908 243 8924 Hewlett-Packard Company Fax: +1 908 243 8850 mailto: jishnu@hp.com Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 18:59:14 -0500 From: Jishnu Mukerji Organization: Hewlett-Packard SGBU/MSO User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: firewall-traversal-ftf@omg.org Subject: Proposed resolution for Issue 7167 Attached. I will post the PDF of the relevant Chapters (CORBA Core Chapter 24 and 15) and updated Firewall Chapter in a ZIP document on the OMG server tomorrow. Jishnu. -- Jishnu Mukerji Senior Systems Architect 1001 Frontier Road, Suite 300 Technology Office Bridgewater NJ 08807, USA Management Software Organization Tel: +1 908 243 8924 Hewlett-Packard Company Fax: +1 908 243 8850 mailto: jishnu@hp.com Issue 7167: Discrepancy in the changes proposed to CSIIOP and CSI modules (firewall-traversal-ftf) Click here for this issue's archive. Source: Hewlett-Packard (Dr. Jishnu Mukerji, jishnu@hp.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: [From Polar humenn] There seems to be a discrepancy in the changes proposed to CSIIOP and CSI modules. The draft document has identical changes to both. I think the intent of the Errata was to have only one, just switch them from CSIIOP to CSI. However, Brian's convenience document doesn't show the change. Now, the draft document ptc/2004-01-01 that we are voting on has both. What to do? Should that be represented by another document, namely CSI, with it's changes, just like 2004-01-02 is? Resolution: In the process of producing the final adopted specification document this change in the existing OMG specification, namely Chapter 24 of CORBA Core was missed because the submitters of the specification failed to identify these changes in Part III of the submission as they were required to. However, this is not a showstopper problem and is easily fixed with the changes enumerated below, without making any changes in the technical content of the sections invovled that are inconsistent with the intent of the adopted specification. Revised Text: 1. Remove section 1.9.2 and 1.9.3 in ptc/04-01-01 [henceforth referred to as document A] 2. Remove the first half of section 1.5.9 of document A starting from the second sentence of the second para of the section and upto and including the last but one paragraph on page 1-20, and append it to Section 24.2.5 "Identity Token Format" of Chapter 24 of Core (that is the CSIv2 Chapter)[henceforth referred to as document B]. 2.a Append a row to table 24-2 with info about ITTCompundToken. 2.b Delete the phrase "as presented in the CSIv2 specification," from the third sentence of the last paragraph inserted into section 24.2.5. 2.c Delete all occurences of the term "CSIv2" form the text added to section 24.2.5. 2.d Append the following to the remaining single sentence in the second paragraph of section 1.5.9 of document A: "(See section 14.2.5 of CORBA Core)" 3. Merge the IDL in section 1.9.3 of document A properly into the IDL for the CSI module that appears in section 24.9.2 document B. 4. Merge the addition to CSIIOP IDL as it appears in Section 1.5.2 of document A s appropriately into the IDL for CSIIOP in section 24.9.3 of document B. 5. In document B insert a section 24.5.1.6 "TAG_IIOP_SEC_TRANS" with a two liner explanation of what this tag is together with the IDL for it from section 1.5.2 of document A. Insert the following as section 24.5.1.6: 24.5.1.6 TAG_IIOP_SEC_TRANS This tag provides a way of specifying addresses and ports for plaintext IIOP service for use by a firewall. module CSIIOP { // A TAG_IIOP_SEC_TRANS component contains a struct // IIOP_SEC_TRANS that gives addressing information for IIOP services // on a host const IOP::ComponentId TAG_IIOP_SEC_TRANS = xx; struct IIOP_SEC_TRANS { TransportAddressList addresses; }; }; Actions taken: March 19, 2004: received issue