Subject: RE: Short summary, CAT-WG Minneapolis meeting

From: "Linn, John" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:58:50 -0500

Per the following excerpt from the short meeting summary regarding the Java
bindings:

> Extended discussion took place on the GSS Java bindings. The conclusion,
> to
> be reflected in a revised draft, was to incorporate a factory approach
> with
> Java interfaces for flexibility, but to provide a simple-to-use shim which
> would instantiate classes corresponding to those interfaces.  A
> separately-defined service provider layer, with definition to be pursued
> simultaneously or later, could allow concurrent use of coexisting GSS
> implementations by an application; absent that layer, an application could
> use CLASSPATHs to select one implementation for its use. 
> 
I've received side discussion suggesting that the following summary would be
more accurate and informative:

Extended discussion took place on the GSS Java bindings. The conclusion, to
be reflected in a revised draft, was to incorporate a factory approach with
Java interfaces for flexibility, but to provide a simple-to-use shim that
would instantiate classes corresponding to those interfaces.  Using the
factory approach, a given application can access multiple mechanisms within
one or more coresident JGSS implementations.  Alternately, an application
can choose to bind to a single JGSS implementation by using CLASSPATH rather
than factories. 

A separately defined service provider (SPI) layer, whose definition may be
pursued later, would enable individually developed SPI provider
implementations to be accessed through a single higher-layer JGSS
implementation. This would avoid the need for applications consuming
services provided by multiple lower-layer JGSS implementations to track the
correspondence among mechanisms, their providers, and associated objects,
thereby simplifying application access to a dynamically-variable set of
available mechanisms. 

Does this match all attendees' understanding of the situation?

--jl
==========================================================================
This message was posted through the Stanford campus mailing list
server.  If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the
message body of "unsubscribe ietf-cat-wg" to [email-masked]

---

From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 14:08:12 -0500 (EST)

From: "Linn, John" <[email-masked]>
   Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:58:50 -0500

This matches my understanding of the discussion which we had.

							- Ted