Reference Implementation Meeting 2011-01-25
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Reference Implementation Workgroup Call
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
12:00 PM EST
Lead: Beau Grantham (Harris)
Attendees: John Williams (Garden State Health Systems/Health-ISP), Umesh Madan (Microsoft Corp), Beau Grantham (Harris), Patrick Pyette (Inpriva, Inc.), Sri Sri Koka (Techsant Technologies ), Mark Bamberg (MEDfx), Greg Meyer (Cerner), Rob Wilmot (Cerner), Will Hartung (Mirth Corp), Andy Oram (O'Reilly Media), Vassil Peytchev (Epic)
Arien -
Just as a reminder, we have the new attendance form on the wiki. Please fill it out now and for each call you attend. I'll hand it off to Beau.
Beau -
A lot going on with connect-a-thon, etc.
Our agenda will be:
Java status - It's been fairly quiet. We've been working on an auditing framework, and we've been working with .NET. Greg, can you give us an update?
Greg -
I put together a quick auditing API - I published a new version yesterday. I had some feedback on some of the attributes so it would be able to facilitate . There are a few simple implementations now. If someone wants to write ATNA (Audit Trail & Node Authentication) implementation, please do as I don't have the scope for it now. Something else is doing performance metrics/ monitoring for Java. I've been working with Chris from .NET on DNS server standard metrics. We have an agreed upon first take at that. Also, looking from monitoring perspective, I'm starting to write some MBeans. I haven't done additional research on how to advertise the JMX.
Beau -
Auditing and monitoring will be nice things to have.
Umesh -
Auditing stuff was implemented a while back on .NET.
Beau -
XD side on Java has been inactive for a few weeks.
Other Java updates?
Mark -
I'm back from my leave. You can give me some stuff to work on.
Beau -
Great. Umesh, how about the .NET update?
Umesh -
I've been working on bug fixes, various improvements to generic BLOB store that should allow any XD. Allows you to associate arbitrary data. I added property bag help and ran a bunch of stress tests against the gateway. It seems to be holding up well to large messages, hundreds messages.
As for documentation - I've finally had some time to document some of the config settings. Time is the main issue there. We're moving forward and getting close to production.
Vassil -
I'll be interested to hear the discussion on ATNA logging.
Greg -
The APIs are published out there. It's a matter of writing an implementation of that that will push it off into whatever ATNA server you're using.
ATNA - Audit Trail and Node Authentication
Beau -
We missed the mark for 1.0 target. The primary thing holding us back is the XD piece. There have been suggestions of having a release with what we've got as 1.0. We would come back with XD module plugged into existing code as 1.1 release. It could be a month or more for solid XD piece in the baseline.
Greg -
I would further qualify that: Along with pushing out a 1.0 release, having some documentation on there explaining that this is a plugable framework, the XD is in development, and if you want you can take the 1.0 RI but you can add in the XD pieces in a "what you see is what you get" type state and still add that into your stack. That's a very common approach with plugable frameworks. Even James is like that.
Umesh -
We want to show progress to the rest of the community. We had good intent, it wasn't anybody's fault. I think it would be good to have this 1.0 release and follow up with 1.1. We're just being pragmatic.
Greg -
At the same time, all I have to do from the release perspective is the stock assembly. As soon as the 1.0 release goes back we update the number to 1.1 and then we essentially have a 1.1 snapshot.
Umesh -
That'll be handy because those running forward with production deployments can at least have a reference point. It will be good to have a checkpoint.
Greg -
The proposal on the table now is, at least on the Java side, is taking the release components for SMTP stack and that becomes 1.0 and we push out a 1.1 snapshot.
Umesh -
The same for .NET.
Beau -
Should we call a vote now?
Arien -
The only thing I worry about is the implementation in NY. They were planning to rely heavily on XD.
Beau -
We just need to stress that we're not leaving XD out - it's coming at a later time.
Umesh -
I'm for it.
Vassil -
I would have liked to separate the milestone numbers. This could have been a great milestone release.
Given the timing I can't object or complain too much. My concern is that once we have a 1.0 release that this team will continue to function to help incorporate XD.
Greg -
I can speak to the Java side. I'm not going anywhere.
Umesh -
.NET isn't going to disappear either.
Beau -
Let's give it a few days in the community and then we can address concerns.
Let's do this the week after the virtual connect-a-thon (Feb. 4).
It will be the same style as the last 2. We'd like to finish up negative testing scenarios. General interoperability testing between 2 implementations as well. Other things people would like to test?
I'll put another article out on the wiki and people can sign up with the HISPs that they're going to be working with.
Other high-level topics or things to follow up on?
[end of meeting]
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
12:00 PM EST
Lead: Beau Grantham (Harris)
Attendees: John Williams (Garden State Health Systems/Health-ISP), Umesh Madan (Microsoft Corp), Beau Grantham (Harris), Patrick Pyette (Inpriva, Inc.), Sri Sri Koka (Techsant Technologies ), Mark Bamberg (MEDfx), Greg Meyer (Cerner), Rob Wilmot (Cerner), Will Hartung (Mirth Corp), Andy Oram (O'Reilly Media), Vassil Peytchev (Epic)
Arien -
Just as a reminder, we have the new attendance form on the wiki. Please fill it out now and for each call you attend. I'll hand it off to Beau.
Beau -
A lot going on with connect-a-thon, etc.
Our agenda will be:
- Discussion on XD and release labels
- Discuss next virtual connect-a-thon
- Other high level topics
Java status - It's been fairly quiet. We've been working on an auditing framework, and we've been working with .NET. Greg, can you give us an update?
Greg -
I put together a quick auditing API - I published a new version yesterday. I had some feedback on some of the attributes so it would be able to facilitate . There are a few simple implementations now. If someone wants to write ATNA (Audit Trail & Node Authentication) implementation, please do as I don't have the scope for it now. Something else is doing performance metrics/ monitoring for Java. I've been working with Chris from .NET on DNS server standard metrics. We have an agreed upon first take at that. Also, looking from monitoring perspective, I'm starting to write some MBeans. I haven't done additional research on how to advertise the JMX.
Beau -
Auditing and monitoring will be nice things to have.
Umesh -
Auditing stuff was implemented a while back on .NET.
Beau -
XD side on Java has been inactive for a few weeks.
Other Java updates?
Mark -
I'm back from my leave. You can give me some stuff to work on.
Beau -
Great. Umesh, how about the .NET update?
Umesh -
I've been working on bug fixes, various improvements to generic BLOB store that should allow any XD. Allows you to associate arbitrary data. I added property bag help and ran a bunch of stress tests against the gateway. It seems to be holding up well to large messages, hundreds messages.
As for documentation - I've finally had some time to document some of the config settings. Time is the main issue there. We're moving forward and getting close to production.
Vassil -
I'll be interested to hear the discussion on ATNA logging.
Greg -
The APIs are published out there. It's a matter of writing an implementation of that that will push it off into whatever ATNA server you're using.
ATNA - Audit Trail and Node Authentication
Beau -
We missed the mark for 1.0 target. The primary thing holding us back is the XD piece. There have been suggestions of having a release with what we've got as 1.0. We would come back with XD module plugged into existing code as 1.1 release. It could be a month or more for solid XD piece in the baseline.
Greg -
I would further qualify that: Along with pushing out a 1.0 release, having some documentation on there explaining that this is a plugable framework, the XD is in development, and if you want you can take the 1.0 RI but you can add in the XD pieces in a "what you see is what you get" type state and still add that into your stack. That's a very common approach with plugable frameworks. Even James is like that.
Umesh -
We want to show progress to the rest of the community. We had good intent, it wasn't anybody's fault. I think it would be good to have this 1.0 release and follow up with 1.1. We're just being pragmatic.
Greg -
At the same time, all I have to do from the release perspective is the stock assembly. As soon as the 1.0 release goes back we update the number to 1.1 and then we essentially have a 1.1 snapshot.
Umesh -
That'll be handy because those running forward with production deployments can at least have a reference point. It will be good to have a checkpoint.
Greg -
The proposal on the table now is, at least on the Java side, is taking the release components for SMTP stack and that becomes 1.0 and we push out a 1.1 snapshot.
Umesh -
The same for .NET.
Beau -
Should we call a vote now?
Arien -
The only thing I worry about is the implementation in NY. They were planning to rely heavily on XD.
Beau -
We just need to stress that we're not leaving XD out - it's coming at a later time.
Umesh -
I'm for it.
Vassil -
I would have liked to separate the milestone numbers. This could have been a great milestone release.
Given the timing I can't object or complain too much. My concern is that once we have a 1.0 release that this team will continue to function to help incorporate XD.
Greg -
I can speak to the Java side. I'm not going anywhere.
Umesh -
.NET isn't going to disappear either.
Beau -
Let's give it a few days in the community and then we can address concerns.
Let's do this the week after the virtual connect-a-thon (Feb. 4).
It will be the same style as the last 2. We'd like to finish up negative testing scenarios. General interoperability testing between 2 implementations as well. Other things people would like to test?
I'll put another article out on the wiki and people can sign up with the HISPs that they're going to be working with.
Other high-level topics or things to follow up on?
[end of meeting]