Future direction of EKMI

[Arshad Noor <arshad.noor@strongauth.com>]

All,

The activity from last week's announcement of the potential
creation of the KMIP TC highlighted, what I believe to be, are
deficiencies in the OASIS process for creating new TCs.  Ben
Tomhave highlighted this far better than I can, so I won't go
over them again.

However, I do believe I owe it to the rest of the TC to explain
my own analysis of the situation.  The work we do on EKMI is
voluntary; but in an economy like this, time is a very precious
commodity, and distractions can mean the difference between a
pay-check and the unemployment line.

What is the future of the EKMI TC in light of the developments
wrt the KMIP TC?  I believe we have three choices:

1) Merge with the KMIP TC and attempt to work with them.

    What of the work we created over the last 2 years?  Based
    on what I've seen of the protocol, most of SKSML will need
    to be thrown out.  While pieces of it may survive (since it
    appears that KMIP has outlined concepts that we've already
    adopted and implemented), most of it will need to change.
    In the end, after another 12-18 months of additional work,
    KMIP may be no further than where SKSML was two years ago.

2) Continue as we are, and work in "competition" with KMIP.

    EKMI has always had a singular vision of the problem we were
    trying to solve.  We haven't changed that vision in 2+ years,
    while the IETF/IEEE efforts have been modifying their targets
    and technology, including adopting some of the concepts we've
    come up with.  Because of this, while it was easy to explain
    the differences in the 3 KM standards efforts in the past, it
    is becoming increasingly difficult to do so today.  Now that
    KMIP is choosing to start-up within OASIS, it will become much
    harder for us to be heard given the marketing budgets of the
    companies in the KMIP list.

3) Shutdown the EKMI TC and take the effort to a new level in
    the marketplace.

    Standards organizations, while useful in arbitrating common
    solutions amongst oligopolies in the latter part of the 20th
    century, are largely redundant in the 21st century world of
    free and open-source software.  (I won't bore you with the
    statistics and market-indicators).

    In a world where so much has been - and continues to be -
    manipulated by people in power, IMO, open-source represents
    "laissez-faire capitalism".  In this "hands-off" market, only
    value determines success.  Not gamesmanship, not marketing
    budgets and definitely not back-room deals and secret
    coalitions.  Just plain and simple value.

    EKMI has been delivering this value even before its TC was
    created: in the royalty-free protocol and in the free and
    open-source software implementation of that protocol.  EKMI
    has been winning over supporters one at a time - by focusing
    on and delivering this value - not product and industry-
    endorsements.  It is this vision and value that will prevail
    through these confusing times.

There may be other choices that I've over-looked, but I plan to
create a ballot with these 3 options and ask all TC members to
speak out on the future of EKMI.  While only voting members can
vote on the ballot - and determine the outcome of this TC - any
EKMI member can respond to this e-mail and "cast their informal
vote" to the TC by voicing their opinion.  While Observers can't
send e-mail directly to this TC, they can certainly comment on
the OASIS charter discussion group and voice their opinion on
the KMIP TC charter, thus voicing their opinion on EKMI and this
TC, indirectly.

As for myself, since I have been, unfortunately, distracted by
these events from the more important work - creating StrongKey
2.0 and taking EKMI/SKSML to the next level - I intend to resign
from the Chair position of EKMI TC upon the conclusion of this
ballot to focus on the tasks ahead of me.

If the vote results in #1 or #2 being the outcome, I will then
solicit nominations for TC Chair to continue the work.  There are
many very smart and capable individuals in the TC who are capable
of doing so.

If #3 is the outcome of the ballot, what then of EKMI?  Will this
vision die?  Not likely!

While the place and words might change, the vision will remain.
StrongAuth will continue to support that vision in the manner it
did before this TC was formed.  There will always be a place on
the internet for like-minded individuals to congregate and share
visionary ideas; I'm sure we'll find each other in such places.

With best regards and many many thanks to everyone who worked on
this vision.  I am sure that I will continue to work with many of
you in the years to come.

Arshad