[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Minutes for SSTC Call (25 January 2011)
> AGENDA: > > 1. Roll Call & Agenda Review. TBD. Abbie's ITU-T item added to agenda. > 2. Need a volunteer to take minutes. Scott volunteered. > 3. Approval of minutes from last meetings: > > - Minutes from SSTC Call on 11 January 2010: > > http://www.oasiszopen.org/apps/org/workgroup/security/email/archives/201101/msg00014.html Moved by Anil, seconded Nate. No objections. > 4. AIs & progress update on current work-items: > > (a) Current electronic ballots: (none). > > (b) Status/notes regarding past ballots: (none). > > (c) Kerberos Attribute Profile: [Josh/Thomas] > - Status: Request submitted for 15-day Public Review. > - Status: Thomas submitted CSD request to Oasis on 15 Dec 2010. > - Status: awaiting response from Oasis. > - #337 on Oasis Issues Tracker: http://tinyurl.com/47yta4p Thomas noted that a question was raised about changes to the Kerb token profile for WSS, but the maintenance TC indicated this was out of scope. > (d) SAML V2.0 Metadata Profile for Algorithm Support Version 1.0: > - Status: seeking to move to CS status. > - AI: Thomas to request CS ballot Creation. Not done yet. > (e) Session Token Profile (Hal) > - Wish to do create CD Ballot. Hal: not looking for ballot, got comments from Scott, and after review and updates, the new draft is not complete. Hal: would like to keep it bearer confirmation only, Scott agrees this is fine. Hal/Scott discussed the requirement for a NameID in the session token, and Scott objects to the assumption that the original SSO event included a NameID or in fact any long term identifier, since that's considered out of scope of the profile and left to deployment. Scott raised the common Shibboleth use case of attributes-only with no long term identifier, and Hal indicated that made sense and would take that back to this team. Hal: hoping to publish soon, looking for vote on next call. > (f) Change Notify Protocol Version 1.0 (Thinh/Phil) > - AI: Seeking to move to CSD status. > - Status: Thomas submitted CSD request to Oasis on 15 Dec 2010. > - Status: awaiting response from Oasis. > - #338 on Oasis Issues Tracker: http://tinyurl.com/47yta4p There was a bit of back and forth about filenames and some image content, but it's moving forward. Nate: Robin had asked about which directories to use for new drafts, and I told her that the Post-2.0 folder should be the main location. > (g) Channel binding proposal (Scott) > - Any updates? > > (h) Metadata extension for Login/Discovery (Scott) > - Status: Thomas submitted CSD request to Oasis on 15 Dec 2010. > - Status: awaiting response from Oasis. > - #339 on Oasis Issues Tracker: http://tinyurl.com/47yta4p > > (i) Enhanced Client or Proxy Profile (Scott) > - Any updates? Expect a new draft fairly soon. > (j) Metadata Extensions for Documentation/Registration (Chad) > - WD02 uploaded before Christmas. > - Any updates? TOPIC: Abbie discussing ITU-T coordination Abbie: SAML 2.0 was published there as a standard. Due to the agreement, it's the TC's responsibility to provide updates and they're concerned about it being out of date. Hal: The only items we would send them are actual OASIS standards, of which we have few. Abbie: Could have draft documents in ITU-T to provoke comment. Hal: Need to separate things...definitely need to send over approved errata and actual standards, regardless of the various other drafts and documents. Abbie: Could get additional implementers with more exposure. Thomas: Can we even share such drafts with them? Hal: All of them are public, but we're not talking about official submissions, just FYIs. Would need to coordinate anything like this with liason staff at OASIS. Abbie: I can coordinate that. Next meeting is in April, we'd have to move quickly. Hal: Suggest chairs compile list of documents we think we should submit officially, and separately let's come up with a list of FYI docs. The official ones need a special majority ballot to approve submission. Hal: Concerned about formatting CSDs into ITU format. Nate: We should consider CS and up only. Abbie: Agree. Thomas: Is there a policy about who gets to decide what to share? Hal: No, nothing outside OS is defined for official purposes. Abbie: We could even just share links. Several: We should do that if possible. Additional discussion about getting wiki links to XSPA material up to date among Hal and David Staggs. Thomas: Nate and I will work on building the document lists. > 5. Assorted mail items: > - NIST IDtrust 2011 > > 6. Other items: Scott mentioned some proposed errata items he's submitted/submitting, will discuss next call. > 7. Next SSTC Call: > - 8 February 2011
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]