OASIS ebXML Core (ebCore) TC

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

Informal ebCore meeting and next steps for CPPA3

  • 1.  Informal ebCore meeting and next steps for CPPA3

    Posted 06-29-2017 21:24
    As part of the work on CPPA3, some TC members and other users of CPA met informally at the Directorate of Labour and Welfare (NAV) in Oslo. NAV are part of an e-health community that has been using ebMS2 and CPPA2 for well over a decade. This community currently involves 10,500 endpoints exchanging several hundreds of thousands of messages per day. This probably makes it one of the largest deployments of ebMS2 and CPPA2 in the world, both in message volume and number of connected endpoints. All communication is configured using version 2 CPA documents. Apart from configuring messaging and message security, the CPAs are also used to provide information on supported versions of business processes and business document schemas. Most communication is between various health care actors and a central agency, but there is also distributed point to point communication between the actors. We reviewed the current draft of the schema, and used representative v2 CPP and CPA samples to evaluate it. One sample v2 CPP configured 110 exchanges in 36 business processes. To support the analysis, an experimental library was used that helps to automatically convert version 2 CPP and CPA documents to their version 3 counterparts. The main goal of this library was to evaluate that all information represented in v2 can be captured in v3, though in the future it might evolve into a tool that v2 users could use if they want to migrate to v3. The tooling will be part of the next version of the open source Python cppa3 library. With respect to the schema, apart from a few minor fixes (fixed in an update to the XSD just uploaded to Kavi), no real issues were found. In parallel, another user community is looking to use CPPA3 XML as configuration distribution format to be served from their community management portal. It will support AS2, AS4 and (delegated) service provider based communication. This is good news, but also means that the schema has to be finalized soon and any necessary incompatible changes need to be done either now, or postponed to a potential future post v3 version. The spec and schema have been fairly stable for quite some time. So I would like to ask you all to please send in any feedback over the next two months. Then, from September on, if no substantial issues have been raised, I would like to start moving this work to CSD and from there open it up for review. Currently known open items are: - X.509 and PKI support (see previous email) in schema and specification - Conformance section in specification Another idea discussed in Oslo and informally with some of you is to add a registration protocol for profiles and agreements. Norwegian e-Health already uses messaging to distribute CPA documents, and the choreography would be very similar to what we already did for ebCore Agreement Update. Any comments and feedback welcome. Kind Regards, Pim


  • 2.  Re: [ebcore] Informal ebCore meeting and next steps for CPPA3

    Posted 07-23-2017 14:37
      |   view attached
    On 29-06-17 16:03, Pim van der Eijk wrote: Currently known open items are: -   X.509 and PKI support (see previous email) in schema and specification -   Conformance section in specification The first of these issues has been addressed in an update to the schema and specification that I will upload in a week or so.  There are two types of additions: 1) Support for certificate policies. 2) Support for constraints on presence of leaf certificates On the first,  the draft schema optionally include certificate policy sets,  which contain policies identified by OID.  These sets can be refenced in CPPs for use with signing,  encryption, client or server TLS.   For example,  a party can express a reference to a set of policies to be used for signing certificates using a SigningCertificatePolicySetRef. On the second,  I'm proposing additional elements to allow parties to express whether specific types of leaf certificates are expected to be specified for particular channels or transports. These constraints can be validated in CPA formation.  As the constraints may vary from certificate type to type,  from channel to channel and from transport to transport,  they can be specified at separately for the concerned channels or transports.  Each of the types can has specified reasonable default values in processing,  so that CPPA3 documents that do not use any of the features are not unnecessarily complicated and can be very succinct.    This feature provides a lot of flexibility for expressing different capabilities of messaging protocols, profiles and implementations.   It allows many common types of profiling to be expressed in a machine-readable format.  Comments always welcome ... Kind Regards, Pim