WSS-Minutes 10-05

No chairs available......[Kelvin travelling,
Chris Kaler might have had some travel problems so.....some discussion
about election of a pro-tem chair] 

Hal volunteered to be chair

Seconded by <sorry...missed  who
seconded>

No objections.

Steve took attendance:

Attendance of Voting Members

 

  Frank Siebenlist Argonne National
Lab

  Hal Lockhart BEA

  Corinna Witt BEA

  Merlin Hughes Betrusted

  Chong-Jen Hsu CommerceOne

  Thomas DeMartini ContentGuard

  Guillermo Lao ContentGuard

  Tim Moses Entrust

  Dana Kaufman Forum Systems

  Toshihiro Nishimura Fujitsu

  Irving Reid HP

  Kojiro Nakayama Hitachi

  Derek Fu IBM

  Maryann Hondo IBM

  Paula Austel, IBM

  Mike McIntosh IBM

  Anthony Nadalin IBM

  Ron Williams IBM

  Bob Morgan Internet2

  Kate Cherry Lockheed Martin

  Vijay Gajjala Microsoft

  Alan Geller Microsoft

  Richard Levinson Netegrity

  Prateek Mishra Netegrity

  Frederick Hirsch Nokia

  Abbie Barbir Nortel

  Steve Anderson OpenNetwork

  Vamsi Motukuru Oracle

  Ramana Turlapati Oracle

  Ben Hammond RSA Security

  Andrew Nash RSA Security

  Rob Philpott RSA Security

  Martijn de Boer SAP

  Blake Dournaee Sarvega

  Pete Wenzel SeeBeyond

  Jeff Hodges Sun Microsystems

  Ronald Monzillo Sun Microsystems

  Symon Chang TIBCO

  John Weiland US Navy

  Phil Hallam-Baker, Verisign

  Maneesh Sahu Westbridge Technology

    

  

Attendance of Prospective Members or Observers

 

  Jerry Schwarz Oracle

  Carolina Canales-Valenzuela Ericsson

  Davanum Srinivas CA

  Ramanathan Krishnamurthy IONA

 

 

Membership Status Changes

 

  Senthil Sengodan Nokia - Requested
membership 9/21/2004

  Charles Knouse Oblix - Withdrew 9/21/2004

  Carolina Canales-Valenzuela Ericsson
- Requested membership 9/23/2004

  Davanum Srinivas CA - Requested membership
10/5/2004

  Don Flinn Individual - Lost voting
status after 10/5/2004 call

  Sundeep Peechu Sargeva - Lost prospective
status after 10/5/2004 call

we do have quorum

Hal:  acceptance of the minutes?

motion to approve, Frederick

second, Tony

no objections to unanimous consent

Tony : report on errata

complete as per last call...change to
X509 profile

this completes what's on the list &
discussed in the last meeting

Any other comments?<none>

SAML & REL profile status- report
from the chairs?

post to list ,  chairs  need
to make a formal call for IPR 

[ Hal made an informal call ]

other document status:

Attachments -Frederick, still some issues
with Dana on  v10 to address  this

Kerberos- profile - Tony- no changes

1.1 version of core?  any changes
? waiting for final comments from group

need to vote it as CD,  go ahead
with SAML & REL without that

Tony can post a new 1.1 ....

any objections? no

Tony to post

interop planning

Kerberos:  Allen Geller, posted
scenarios , has not gotten any response

Attachments: Blake, posted draft of
scenarios, gotten some comments & still in the process of updating

proposed date for interop ...week of
  Oct 25th (ibm, datapower, cyclone)  Nov 15th (hitachi, sun,
oracle, datapower, westbridge)

have we decided to hold two? 

time to make a decision 

Blake made a motion to do Nov 15th,
seconded by datapower

Tony spoke against it,  we need
to get back to WS-I ASAP

can all companies that can do it on
the 25th, can they repeat it on the 15th?

IBM, no

Take a vote, roll call

not sure if this is the appropriate
proceedure...it does affect the TC as a whole

Tony, why does it matter if we do 2?

Hal, do you want to propose an ammedment
to the proposal?

Tony, that has been the proposal all
along.

If people can't make it that's ok

will be doing the same scenarios ....for
the oct date there are only 3 companies, 

let's not spend any more time....table
the matter and let the participants make the arrangements?

what is the objective? an interop is
a pre-condition to committee draft

BSP can't work on it until its a committee
draft

we could go to committee draft sooner....but
that will need to be following the process

and the chairs will work that

Issues list -Vijay

282- pending

298-pending Tony, not
clear on the change required, in addition to core statement about ordering,
token profiles

can define their own order

Tony, does this go into errata or 1.1?

Tony thinks this is a 1.1 issue. Vijay,
it is a 1.next issue.......

309-pending- specific
item is fixed, but issue is to review all token profiles and see if it
occurred anywhere else...

321-closed- Frederick thinks
this should be closed (Dana agreed)

327,328-closed in errata

53 closed by 282 noting
in the issues list the remaining part of this is in 282.

84 text proposed ...Tony to look
at resolution

86 pending ( a champion) also
related to resolution on 319

this is so old the name of the profile
it relates to has changed.... does anyone want to advance this profile,
otherwise propose that we close this issue 

103  Ron-to figure out the
status of this issue

196-closed

310-open, need discussion on
the mailing list 

( goal would be to put Vijays text in
profile (Tony?) and mark this as pending )

did we just and another kind of key
identifier that everyone needs to support ? (Ron)

the code doesn't exist for this, people
don't do thumbprint based lookup

are we talking about the next version?
if there is value in doing this it should be mandatory

it is useful to be well defined, we're
adding another form of index

Hal- 

its reasonably established in the PKI
world

choices are don't define it, make it
optional, make it mandatory

Oracle-

what is the impact on other security
groups? this will change things around

Hal-

BSP  would have to decide whether
or not to profile this

a good identifier is one that is unambiguos
and in widespread use

the SKI has 2 strikes against it

Hal:

issuer serial number issue: issuer is
a dn, and there are repositories who are doing a full x509 dn match and
pkix says that the only thing

you are required to do is a byte by
byte compare, and the result is that somethings don't match when they should

BEA has an issue with making this mandatory.

Vijay,

it could be optional

Oracle-

if we take the thumbprint approach,
is this something in LDAP or is this external?

Ron-

question is whether or not you capture
the thumbprint and store it in LDAP

you  have to change what you store
in LDAP

anyone object to moving on?

315-pending (Tony to put Hal's
text into core)

317,318,319-open  Vijay
has text, not posted to the list yet, get discussion 

326,329 -open (Frederick)

330 pending- Dana, errata to
errata small changes for editors (Tony) add unless there are problems

331-open

Paula Austel, Phil Hallam-Baker