RE: Embarrassing episode with conference call

[Darren Platt <dplatt@securant.com>]

Marc, et. al.,

For the record, I think this issue was caused by an innocent mistake made by
the people/processes at the concall org. (not Netegrity), and that it can
and will be simply resolved.  No apology is necessary.

When I spoke with a supervisor at the concall org. that morning, she told me
that there was a comment in the 'owner' field that applied to all Netegrity
calls - saying to exclude certain competitors as a policy for its company's
calls (certainly a reasonable policy).  I don't think the person who
established that policy is likely to have known about our calls.

I don't feel that there is currently any need to change the current concall
arrangements from a 'fairness' standpoint.  If however, it makes sense to
share costs, we would certainly be happy to contribute.  Even if it means
drinking beer ;~).

Regards,

Darren






> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Farrell [mailto:stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie]
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 9:03 AM
> To: Hal Lockhart
> Cc: 'Chanliau, Marc'; Eve L. Maler;
> security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: Embarrassing episode with conference call
>
>
>
> Hal, Marc,
>
> I'm sure you're right Hal, and this is just a hangover from
> some previous conf. call instruction. As to costs: I'm not sure
> how we could share 'em, unless we rotate or oasis have some
> scheme. (Maybe we can buy Marc & Prateek lots of beer at all
> the F2F meetings:-)
>
> Stephen.
>
> Hal Lockhart wrote:
> >
> > Personally I have no concerns and I am probably as sensitive to this as
> > anybody. I believe this is the service Netegrity uses
> internally. I suspect
> > that the instructions may have been given for some Netegrity internal
> > concall where they (quite legitimately) wanted to make sure to exclude
> > competitors. Somehow these instructions got applied to our call.
> >
> > Marc raises a good point. I would hate to see one party get
> stuck with the
> > tab forever. Maybe the companies could cover the cost on a
> rotating basis.
> > We would certainly be glad to pay for some of them.
> >
> > Hal
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Chanliau, Marc [mailto:MChanliau@netegrity.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 11:10 AM
> > > To: Eve L. Maler; Chanliau, Marc;
> > > security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > Cc: elm@east.sun.com
> > > Subject: RE: Embarrassing episode with conference call
> > >
> > >
> > > Wow!!!! I was not aware of this. I sure apologize, although
> > > I'm not sure for
> > > what. Just thinking that Netegrity would do anything to preclude
> > > participants from participating in an open standards group
> > > discussion is
> > > insulting enough. To remove any doubt, maybe somebody else
> > > should organize
> > > those calls. I've done that (using my company's money) to help the TC
> > > community, certainly not to bar members from being included.
> > > I will call the
> > > conference organization which handled that call and let you
> > > all know what
> > > really happened.
> > > Marc Chanliau
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Eve L. Maler [mailto:eve.maler@east.sun.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:52 PM
> > > To: mchanliau@netegrity.com
> > > Cc: elm@east.sun.com
> > > Subject: Embarrassing episode with conference call
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Marc-- I'm not sure if you joined the call on Tuesday in
> > > time to hear
> > > the problem we had with the conference company.  They were
> > > holding back
> > > from letting Securant and Entrust join the call because they had
> > > instructions not to let them on!  I suggest you get them to
> > > remove that
> > > from their records, and also send an apology to at least
> > > Darren (who we
> > > know was held back for about 15 minutes) and possibly the
> > > others -- maybe
> > > even the whole list.  Or if this was some aberration and the
> > > conference
> > > company never should have had this instruction, an
> > > explanation of this
> > > would be great.  I don't want there to be any lingering doubt that
> > > Netegrity is fully supporting this open standards effort,
> > > which would look
> > > bad for you and hurt the group's work...
> > >
> > >       Eve
> > > --
> > > Eve Maler                                          +1 781 442 3190
> > > Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center    eve.maler @ east.sun.com
> > >
>
> --
> ____________________________________________________________
> Stephen Farrell
> Baltimore Technologies,   tel: (direct line) +353 1 881 6716
> 39 Parkgate Street,                     fax: +353 1 881 7000
> Dublin 8.                mailto:stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie
> Ireland                             http://www.baltimore.com