[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [security-services] DS-1-10 remains unresolved (wrt:AuthenticationMethods and ConfirmationMethods)
Minutes for Telecon, Tuesday 19 Mar 2002 http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200203/msg00137.html > - Hal to lead thru all red issues > - DS-1-10 SubjectConfirmation Descriptions > - Hal had proposed a resolution, and can create specific text > - Irving: can they be removed from core and left to profiles? > - Jeff: DS-1-13 are intertwined > - Hal: they could be dealt with separately > - general agreement (among those on call) that SubjectConf & > AuthNMethod are distinct > - Phill was primary dissenter, but is not currently on call > - general agreement that lack of resolution would ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [note incomplete sentence!] My & Joe's recollection was that the final line should be concluded with "...lack of resoultion would cause folks to ~not~ vote to approve the spec set." We didn't vote to include a resolution to that issue as we recall, instead we jumped to DS-1-13. Also, this issue wasn't discussed during yesterday's telecon, according to the minutes. So, this issue needs to be addressed. Presently there is not a cohesive proposal with specific proposed document changes. Also, this is an inconclusive thread on the list: ISSUE: core-27: Should AuthenticationMethods andConfirmationMethods be listed in the same subsection? [Jeff] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200203/msg00006.html [Hal] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200203/msg00078.html [Phill] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200203/msg00079.html [Hal] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200203/msg00134.html In addition to the above thread, here's the message that formed the basis for DS-1-10: New Issue: SubjectConfirmation descriptions http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200201/msg00247.html Summary: There are two aspects to this.. 1. whether ConfirmationMethods and AuthenticationMethods are in fact distinct, and as a result should be listed and/or identified (somehow) separately. 2. The ConfirmationMethod/AuthenticationMethod descriptions in Core-XX are inadequate and need work. Hal proposes some new language in his "New Issue: SubjectConfirmation descriptions", but more work is likely needed. We need to resolve (1), and complete (2) accordingly. Joe & I'll see that it gets added to the agendas of upcoming telecons. JeffH
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC