These are the final results of the Community Draft Ballot for JSR #76. The Executive Committee for SE/EE has not approved this ballot.

JSR76

StageCommunity Draft Ballot

Ballot durationJan 9, 2001 to Jan 15, 2001

Votes

SE/EE

Accenture

Apache Software Foundation

Apple Computer, Inc.

BEA Systems

Borland Software Corporation

Caldera Systems

Cisco Systems

Compaq Computer Corporation

Fujitsu Limited

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Lea, Doug

Oracle

Progress Software

Sun Microsystems, Inc.

WebGain

Vote Log

SE/EE

On 2001-01-15 Progress Software voted No with the following comment:
The arguments presented by BEA and others raise several concerns that need to be addressed before this JSR can be passed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-15 Cisco Systems voted No with the following comment:
There are many issues raised by vendors whose business is implementing this technology ! We should take time to regroup and resolve them before we proceed. May be there is an opportunity here to add some new ideas.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-15 Hewlett-Packard voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-15 Oracle voted No with the following comment:
Oracle supports the arguments presented by BEA and others.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-15 Compaq Computer Corporation voted No with the following comment:
The vendors voting no have valid reasons to vote down this JSR.   
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-15 Apache Software Foundation voted No with the following comment:
Several vendors who would implement this JSR have raised valid concerns on its technical merits.  These concerns should be carefully evaluated and addressed and a general consensus reached before this JSR moves forward in its progress to join the core platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-15 IBM voted Yes with the following comment:
The Community Review of this JSR has raised a set oc concerns that need to be addressed by the Expert Group in conjuntion with the wider community, before Public Review. The JSR is complex, but there appear few concrete suggestions  in balancing simplification with achieving the breadth of its original approved scope.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-15 Borland Software Corporation voted No with the following comment:
The relationship and interaction between these APIs and the RMI/IIOP protocol and CSI/V2 is not addressed.Are RMI/JRMP and RMI/IIOP both target protocols for these APIs? I.e. Will the RI support both protocols? 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-15 Caldera Systems voted No with the following comment:
I agree with the arguments presented by BEA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-15 Fujitsu Limited voted Yes with the following comment:
We may need to discuss about issues raised by BEA and WebGain.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-13 Lea, Doug voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-12 WebGain voted No with the following comment:
JSR 76 wants to move functionality into the application code that WebGain believes doesn't belong there.  Security information should remain separate from the business logic, and therefore we vote no here.  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-12 BEA Systems voted No with the following comment:
JSRs 76 & 78 add much complexity in the form new classes, new programming models, and new security models. JSRs 76 and 78, combined, represent a major complication of RMI, whose existing API is simple and elegant. We do not make this no vote lightly, knowing that some in the Java community (Jini) very much needs these features. However, we remain unconvinced of this JSR's desireability for J2SE, and find it to be against the interests of J2EE. 

JSR 76 defines new APIs for network security implementations, non-uniform security, and access control, while the industry trend is clearly in the direction of factoring security out of business logic. If JSR 76 becomes part of J2SE, J2EE components will have to either prohibit the use of these APIs or surface the use of these APIs in the deployment descriptor. Also, since IIOP with CSIv2 is the mandated technology for EJB 2.0 interoperability, the mapping of JSR 76 features to CSIv2 should be formalized before this JSR can be finalized.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2001-01-09 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------