[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [cti] Re: [EXT] [cti] Motion for an OASIS Open Repository for STIX Enhancement Proposals (SEPs)
I fully support this updated / augmented motion from Trey that includesÂmy additional points.
Bret
From: cti@lists.oasis-open.org <cti@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Jane Ginn @ OASIS <jg@ctin.us>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2018 4:30:00 PM
To: cti@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [cti] Re: [EXT] [cti] Motion for an OASIS Open Repository for STIX Enhancement Proposals (SEPs)ÂAll:
I second the Augmented version of the Motion by Trey & Bret.
Jane
On 7/31/2018 3:15 PM, Trey Darley wrote:
> Thank you to Bret for providing additional precision to my motion to
> open the OASIS Open Repository for STIX Enhancement Proposals
> (SEPs). It is a fact of life that the TC working calls typically occur
> quite late in my day (as opposed to folks on the US Western Seaboard)
> so it does happen that from time to time I respond imperfectly to
> consensus reached on TC working calls, modulo the timeshift.
>
> Naturally, given that we did discuss this on the weekly TC working
> call at some length, I am grateful for the clarification which Bret
> has provided and do hereby amend my original motion to include the
> additional details which Bret outlines below.
>
> My motion, thus augmented, still stands. If there have been no
> objections by Tuesday, 07 August at 21h UTC Bret, Ivan, or I will
> submit the form [1] to request OASIS staff to create the repository.
>
> [1]: https://clicktime.symantec.com/a/1/ tGQs29UCugcEleYRJG3Sl4iEIbLWzN leRMdWGwDW2cg=?d=dbF- oa6Sgr5cbpQi1UJsp8ZH2olyYt1kKn -l6VHS3noHzcRWZxemU6Ik80aLNk9- N2L3j4WgMCqdw76LrvcEF5zMsfqTSx PyQkEII5j84PmE1Eh- wZPDt2t1lsO0V7sxG7MFTdPRSv8g2t 9bSxqzSE_FiU2SDxvDSU_ y0sx9DCykbMP5NThWlernbcAbuZrCk Ec4Y9asKXVBuOj61xX8R4eXGOfpIos oq-ttmzfVi7z_ HfsXG1LTQIIqQ3V25CT97OByHURV- m_ AsvotNnPwnyvVkNhydeQ7am1ZgRnkq dAONu60Ttp6vCJ7wcOrm0O7wUqtXCo ruLpuINwPlAY9n4GU-_ eJiafG0gaeqIkv_ mfgF4t30eOnUB4TxS95JkFDIw9f3NS tCcXzjI0GddURgLb9Egi5oU2FGmO0T 3fAoci_ pAIh96umJQEuP7qbORCs8FpPRyBd7l hqS- LIC7msxQqNyJth9AZj8CCqwJ97dOWD FDl8m_4u9FxtYkfD24NBEQ%3D%3D& u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.oasis- open.org%2Fresources%2Ftc- admin-requests%2Fopen- repository-request https://clicktime.symantec.
>
> Cheers,
> Trey
>
> On 31.07.2018 21:52:27, Bret Jordan wrote:
>> I will second this only with the following caveats, otherwise the
>> motion does not address the concerns I had originally.
>>
>>
>> 1) I think the repos need to have a CTI prefix in their name, so I
>>ÂÂÂ would propose we use the name: "cti-sep-repository"
>>
>>
>> 2) This repository will only be used for the following types of
>>ÂÂÂ SEPs.
>>
>>
>>Â * New STIX Domain Objects (SDOs)
>>Â * New STIX Relationship Objects (SROs)
>>Â * New STIX Cyber Observables (SCOs)
>>Â * New STIX Object Extensions
>>ÂÂÂÂ * These are named groups of properties.
>>
>> 3) The following types of SEPs are out of scope for this repository
>>ÂÂÂ and work:
>>
>>
>>Â * Redefining an existing property on an object to add clarity or
>>ÂÂÂ enhanced meaning.
>>
>>Â * For example, explaining double or triple tagging of data in a
>>ÂÂÂ "tags" property.
>>
>>Â * Redefining the semantics of existing SDOs, SROs, and/or SCOs (or
>>ÂÂÂ properties thereof) which are already defined in CSDs and/or CSs.
>>
>>Â * Adding to or redefining the semantics of STIX Patterning
>>ÂÂÂ (including, but not limited to adding new elements, expressions,
>>ÂÂÂ operators, or language elements).
>>
>> 4) This repository and registry will be used for SEPs that are
>>ÂÂÂ officially submitted to the TC by TC members or for SEPs created
>>ÂÂÂ by the TC itself.
>>
>> 5) We will in the coming weeks investigate a different option for
>>ÂÂÂ registering enhancements / extensions from:
>>
>>Â * TC members that do not wish to submit their IPR to the TC
>>Â * TC members that do wish to submit their SEP to the TC as long as
>>ÂÂÂ it is unmodified.
>>Â * Third-Parties that do not wish to submit their IPR to the TC
>>Â * Third-Parties that do wish to submit their IPR to the TC
>>
>>
>> On the working call today I was okay with coming to middle ground to
>> address Allan's concerns, however, the motion did not capture what I
>> believe we agreed to on the call. If my caveats are accepted as part
>> of the motion, then I am okay with this moving forward.
>>
--
R. Jane Ginn, MSIA, MRP
Secretary, Cyber Threat Intelligence Technical Committee (CTI TC)
OASIS
jg@ctin.us
+1(928)399-0509
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
com/a/1/ QY6diZUWZGbtE7rPk8d12QfLlQGmw3 02YPksAhiKorA=?d=dbF- oa6Sgr5cbpQi1UJsp8ZH2olyYt1kKn -l6VHS3noHzcRWZxemU6Ik80aLNk9- N2L3j4WgMCqdw76LrvcEF5zMsfqTSx PyQkEII5j84PmE1Eh- wZPDt2t1lsO0V7sxG7MFTdPRSv8g2t 9bSxqzSE_FiU2SDxvDSU_ y0sx9DCykbMP5NThWlernbcAbuZrCk Ec4Y9asKXVBuOj61xX8R4eXGOfpIos oq-ttmzfVi7z_ HfsXG1LTQIIqQ3V25CT97OByHURV- m_ AsvotNnPwnyvVkNhydeQ7am1ZgRnkq dAONu60Ttp6vCJ7wcOrm0O7wUqtXCo ruLpuINwPlAY9n4GU-_ eJiafG0gaeqIkv_ mfgF4t30eOnUB4TxS95JkFDIw9f3NS tCcXzjI0GddURgLb9Egi5oU2FGmO0T 3fAoci_ pAIh96umJQEuP7qbORCs8FpPRyBd7l hqS- LIC7msxQqNyJth9AZj8CCqwJ97dOWD FDl8m_4u9FxtYkfD24NBEQ%3D%3D& u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.oasis- open.org%2Fapps%2Forg% 2Fworkgroup%2Fportal%2Fmy_ workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]