Re: [scap_interest] scap_interest Digest, Vol 5, Issue 19

<> Fri, 17 February 2012 15:28 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDDAF21F86A7 for <>; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 07:28:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.949
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.650, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wSh6WX6YyiFp for <>; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 07:28:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10B9621F86A0 for <>; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 07:28:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id q1HFSZUG006807 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:28:36 -0500
Received: from ( []) by (RSA Interceptor); Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:28:23 -0500
Received: from ( []) by (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id q1HFSMtt009152; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:28:23 -0500
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:28:22 -0500
From: <>
To: <>, <>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:28:21 -0500
Thread-Topic: scap_interest Digest, Vol 5, Issue 19
Thread-Index: AQHM7NTHhKFALzSMaEqu/OwLf8yIt5ZBJcRwgAAN3oA=
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [scap_interest] scap_interest Digest, Vol 5, Issue 19
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion List for IETFers interested in the Security Content Automation Protocol \(SCAP\)." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:28:38 -0000

Hello, Rubin, Kent, all,

I think interoperability testing is an important aspect of the standardization process.  It helps us prove out the specifications are well written (or that they require changes) which enables new vendors or implementers to code against the same specification and expect an interoperable implementation. 

This is important at each stage, from supporting data formats to the ability to uniformly exchanging those formats with interpretable controls and expected messaging patterns/flows.  The specifications for the data formats should go beyond schemas to cover error handling and other requirements for developers to enable interoperable solution development.  When you move to transport and APIs for exchanges, this becomes more critical if we want to evolve the ability to support the ecosystem of data format specifications.  Products and use of these specifications can diverge by adding value in areas like data analysis and how exchanged data sets may be leveraged.  

Thank you,

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of Oliva, Ruben [USA]
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: [scap_interest] scap_interest Digest, Vol 5, Issue 19

To all:

Kent brings up a good point.

Validation does not equate to interoperability.

How does the community feel about an SCAP interoperability testing function?

David Oliva

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 1:00 PM
Subject: scap_interest Digest, Vol 5, Issue 19

If you have received this digest without all the individual message attachments you will need to update your digest options in your list subscription.  To do so, go to

Click the 'Unsubscribe or edit options' button, log in, and set "Get MIME or Plain Text Digests?" to MIME.  You can set this option globally for all the list digests you receive at this point.

Send scap_interest mailing list submissions to

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

You can reach the person managing the list at

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of scap_interest digest..."
scap_interest mailing list