Why not “in parallel”?
As is always the case with work in TC’s, the
need for prioritization will depend on who’s willing to invest the time to work
on items. If the folks signed up to work on an accepted work item (e.g. editor,
text contributors), are also signed up to work on another item, then obviously
we have to prioritize. If there’s no overlap, then the items should be able to
be done in parallel, right?
I agree that if there are folks that want
to now pick up the work items for the XCBF and/or Minimalist profiles, and
these are the same folks or represent a big overlap with those that want to
work on the OTP profile, then, yes, we need to discuss the prioritization.
And thank you for reminding me that the
minimalist profile is yet another profile that we accepted as a work item that
isn’t explicitly listed in the charter deliverables (I had mentioned REL, XCBF,
and SwA previously). And of course when those were accepted, no one called them
out of scope or clamored that we had to update the charter in order to work on
them.
Rob Philpott
Senior Consulting Engineer
RSA Security Inc.
Tel: 781-515-7115
Mobile:
617-510-0893
Fax: 781-515-7020
Email:
I-name: =Rob.Philpott
From: Anthony Nadalin
[mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005
7:57 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [wss] DRAFT Minutes
WSS-TC 10.4.2004
Since we have voted to do additional work it may be
good next meeting to spend some time prioritizing work and seeing what work may
be done in parallel after 1.1 is complete (or far enough down the pike that
additional work won't effect it).
We have already accepted the XCBF Profile and the Minimalist profile, where
does the OTP Profile fit, before, after in-between ?
Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122
Ron
Williams/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Ron
Williams/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
10/04/2005 01:17 PM
To
cc
Subject
[wss] DRAFT
Minutes WSS-TC 10.4.2004
For comment and
correction
~r
•
✓ 1 Call
to order/roll call 10.4.05 9:04:28 AM
Chairs: Kelvin Lawrence,
Secretary: Don Flinn
Minutes: Ron Williams
Attendance
Attendance
List
Voting
Members
Maneesh
Sahu
Actional Corporation
Duane
Nickull Adobe
Hal
Lockhart
BEA Systems, Inc.
Denis
Pilipchuk BEA Systems,
Inc.
Corinna
Witt BEA
Systems, Inc.
Rich
Levinson Computer
Associates
Thomas
DeMartini ContentGuard
Dana
Kaufman Forum
Systems, Inc.
Toshihiro
Nishimura Fujitsu Limited
Kefeng
Chen
GeoTrust
Irving
Reid
Hewlett-Packard
Kojiro
Nakayama Hitachi
Derek
Fu
IBM
Kelvin
Lawrence
IBM
Mike
McIntosh IBM
Anthony
Nadalin IBM
Ron
Williams
IBM
Don
Flinn
Individual
Kate
Cherry
Lockheed Martin
Paul
Cotton
Microsoft Corporation
Vijay
Gajjala
Microsoft Corporation
Martin
Gudgin Microsoft
Corporation
Chris
Kaler
Microsoft Corporation
Frederick
Hirsch Nokia Corporation
Abbie
Barbir
Nortel
Prateek
Mishra Oracle
Corporation
Vamsi
Motukuru Oracle
Corporation
Ben
Hammond
RSA Security
John
Linn
RSA Security
Rob
Philpott
RSA Security
Pete
Wenzel
SeeBeyond
Ronald
Monzillo Sun
Microsystems
John
Weiland US Dept of the
Navy
Hans
Granqvist VeriSign
Members
Steve
Anderson
BMC Software
Carolina
Canales-Valenzuela Ericsson
Jeff
Hodges NeuStar, Inc.
Blake
Dournaee Sarvega
Will
Raymond Tibco
Member
that regained voting status after 10/4/05 Meeting
Steve
Anderson
BMC Software
Jeff
Hodges NeuStar, Inc.
Will
Raymond Tibco
19 REQUIRED - 31 ATTENDING - Quorum Achieved
▼
✓ 2 Reading/Approving
minutes of last meeting (Sept 20th) [1] 10.4.05
9:13:13 AM
• ✓
Approved by unanimous consent (no objections registered)
▼
✓ 3 Review
of actions from prior meeting minutes [1] 10.4.05
9:14:30 AM
• ✓
Actions are caught up - closed or made issues (Kelvin)
•
✓ 4 One
Time Password proposal (continue discussion and try to reach closure)
10.4.05 9:14:37 AM
Chris - limit discussion to 30 mintues
Paul Cotton - had questions answered during dialogue.
Paul Cotton - proposed way forward. Not convinced work is in
scope for TC. Simple procedure: Have proponents move that work on OTP
profile is in scope, triggering an electronic ballot to TC to determine whether
or not this is to be a deliverable.
Hans - Seems ec vote would take a long time.
Kelvin - if such a motion was put forward - Oasis has 15
days in which to call an electronic ballot - + 7 to 15 days for actual vote,
and Oasis is responsible for the ballot. We'd be clarifying the charter, not
amending it.
Mary - 2/3 majority required for passage, no more than 1/4 voting
no.
Rob - Work item is in scope - TC should decide whether we
want to work on deliverable - asserts clarification not required.
Abby agrees with Paul as vote being the most efficient means
to address issue.
Rob - TC has to decide whether or not TC wants to do the
work, and then go forward with "official" mechanism (clarification
vote).
Kelvin - decide as a TC how to close issue.
Ask chair to work with TC Admin to determine whether OTP
profile is in scope.
Will (tibco) - RSA assures us that OTP is unencumbered.
Kelvin - This TC is still operating under old TC rules.
Paul - TC Admin will be reluctant to "rule" on
scope issue.
Mary - a vote by the TC to
Abby (verisign) - Can we simply take a vote to see if the TC
wants to do the work?
Hal - Only 3 or 4 individuals typically work on profiles, so
issue of TC wanting to do the work boils down to those that do the work.
Kelvin - we get into situations that only a vote will break
the stalemate. Pauls Proposal. Rob's work with TC admin offline. Mary said no
admin ruling until a decision (vote) and appeal to admin.
Ron Monzillo - decide whether we want to take on the work.
(?) What is the objective of the TC following publication of
the 1.1 specs.
TC - conversion to new IPR rules we have 18 months to switch
or vote on shifting to new.
Hal - suggest a motion be made . . .
Hal - propose to do work - see if TC by simple majority
wants to do the work. If yes, Paul can still call for formal charter
clarification resulting in formal Oasis vote.
Hans - move to "vote on the amended proposal as sent
out by john linn, 8.2005, WSS-OTP token profile.
Hal - seconded
Abby - seconded
Two questions on
Tony - framework or technology - unclear as to what is being
proposed as input, output, and ipr. Text is unclear.
Hans - input - two existing OTP proposals - RSA produced,
and one that Verisign has produced - no IP on Verisign producted. This is a
framework, not a mechanism.
John Lynn (RSA) - conceptually parallel - a method
independant framework - no proposal for a particuluar method - the methods
themseleves are not in scope of this proposal.
RSA - no claims at the level of the document (IPR) -
no claims and no evidence of any. Input document - won't submit if doesn't
comply with IP rules.
Paul - have to disclose any IPR and that of any other
contributor.
Asked and answered by RSA and Verisign
Will - proposal - do the work to create a framework who's
purpose is to support a proprietary format
(discussion) disputes this . . .
Interop question - is there a common format to be
implemented and support to enable interop testing.
Three companies attest to framework -
Paul - in the past - we actually physical interop testing -
interop validates the framework - but underlying mechanisms don't need to be implemented
by the participants.l
Hal - thinks there are one or more mechanisms that could be
implemented for use in interop.
Only one framework in the past, and that was the core
document.
Paul puts the questions -
Hal and Abby Seconds
Kelvin - Roll Call Vote
(Ron's unofficial tally:
yes no
abstain
sandhu (no repsonse)
nichol a
thurston (no response)
lockhart y
fillchuck a
witt y
levinson y
demaritni a
kafuman a
nishimuru a
chen (no response)
reid y
nakamuro a
foo (no response)
hondo (no response)
lawrence a
mcintosh n
nadalin n
williams n
flinn
a
cherry y
cotton n
gaya n
gudge n
kaler n
hirsch y
baiberi n
mishra y
motokuru y
hammond y
linn y
philpott y
dubour (no response)
wenzel a
monzillo y
wailtand y
hans y
Hal - majority of non-abstenstions
14 yes - 8 no - 9 abstensions: Motion Carries)
Don Flinn's official tally:
Vote
Details
Maneesh
Sahu
Duane
Nickull A
Gene
Thurston
Hal
Lockhart Y
Denis
Pilipchuk A
Corinna
Witt Y
Rich
Levinson Y
Thomas
DeMartini
A
Dana
Kaufman
A
Toshihiro
Nishimura A
Kefeng
Chen
Irving
Reid Y
Kojiro
Nakayama A
Derek
Fu
Maryann
Hondo
Kelvin
Lawrence
A
Mike
McIntosh N
Anthony
Nadalin N
Ron
Williams N
Don
Flinn
A
Kate
Cherry Y
Paul
Cotton N
Vijay
Gajjala N
Martin
Gudgin N
Chris
Kaler N
Frederick
Hirsch Y
Abbie
Barbir N
Prateek
Mishra Y
Vamsi
Motukuru Y
Ben
Hammond
Y
John
Linn Y
Rob
Philpott Y
Martijn
de Boer
Pete
Wenzel
A
Ronald
Monzillo Y
John
Weiland Y
Hans
Granqvist Y
yes
14
no
8
abstain
9
Paul move to clarify charter to indicate OTP work is in
scope (OTP one time password token profile), to add it to the deliverables.
Abby - seconded
Kellvin - Oasis must call the vote
Mary - believes Paul is asking whether the TC needs to
change the vote. Any work undertaken by the TC may be appealed to TC admin.
Mary - Appeal to TC admin
TC votes they would like to clarify the charter and
undertake the work item with wording as to what the charter should say.
You can't clarify the charter and change it - these are two
separate processses.
Why must whole TC take up the issue?
TC has voted to create an OTP profile.
Rob Philpott objects to Paul's motion. My opinion that when
TC accepts work item - its supposed to be in scope. There is an appeal process
whereby 3 or more can appeal. - Withdrawn
Hal - agrees -
Tony - you can always call for a clarification.
Chris - vote on the final text of the charter clarification.
Paul withdraws motion to clarify charter, Abby agrees
• ✓
5 Issues list review
10.4.05 10:25:16 AM
Pending Review
430 - comments on the call from Mishra/Oracle: closed w/out
objection
432 - : closed w/out objection
433 - : closed w/out objection
434 - schema corrections to SAML token 1.1 (scott cantor):
closed w/out objection
436 - comments from Mark Wahl: closed w/out objection
437 - comments from Mark Wahl - username profile: closed
w/out objection
438 - comments from Wahl - : closed w/out objection
Pending
334 - XML Id Issue: Tony Nadalin to incorporate changes:
closed w/out objection
404 - RFC 4120 and 1510: Tony - changes made, not on list:
pending
405 - (405 done, 429 not complete- monzillo): move to
PENDING REVIEW
429 - still being discussed; ron and gudge discussion, about
encrypted key - related to kerberos token profile. Ref type should be changed
to token type (gudge): OPEN w/out objections
Kelvin - for J Hodges - 428 "closed because no action
proposed" - Gudge to take AI to trace 428 and was Jeff's proposal on the
table when voted.
439 - comments from J Hodges on call - referenced but not
cited. Editorial Fixes - changes made, not posted (tony): Status Pending
443 - J Hodges - WSU timestamp description: made not posted
(tony): PENDING
OPEN
444 - WSS Page contains 10.04 errata - but have backed out
certain errata. Paul requests it be taken out when fixed or adopt
proposal via x.509v3 suggestion. Make errata reflect changes in 1.1 document
(Paul). X.509 URI's are out of sync with current version (1.1) of the document.
(Paul) Wants errata to reflect multiple decisions. (Gudge) replace
"#X.509" with "#X.509v1". (Tony) we'll be breaking 1.0
versions by doing this. (Paul) by leaving the "incorrect" URI in the
errata will encourage people to continue to do the wrong thing.
No objections to making the errata changes (URI Only).
Gudge - Net effect of three issues is to "fix" URI
reference.: remains OPEN
427 - : CLOSED w/ no action w/out objections
435 - pratik sent a notice to vijay leaving a couple of
items. (tony) open item of formal comback. (chris) have to close public
comments - missing a few issues from public interop., related to 431: OPEN
445 - changes from erratta no included in v1 - editorial
change: moved to PENDING
446 - clarification for STR transform, request someone to
make changes and propose text. (Gudge takes AI): OPEN
440, 441, 443, (Chris) Wants some discussion on the list so
wee can close these.
• ❑ 6 Public
review status/outlook for 1.1 final phases
▼
✓ 7 Other
business
▼
✓ Final Roll - Call
• ✓
Mike McIntosh
• ✓
Gudge
•
✓ 8 Adjournment
10.4.05 10:59:42 AM
Motion to adjourn and second.
_____________________________
PDF Version: [attachment "WS-SEC TC Minutes
10.4.2005.pdf" deleted by Anthony Nadalin/Austin/IBM] OPML Version: [attachment "WS-SEC TC Minutes
10.4.2005.opml" deleted by Anthony Nadalin/Austin/IBM]
