[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Minutes of WSS Call 2005-01-11
Minutes of WSS Call 2005-01-11. Please send any corrections to the list, I may not have all the names/affiliations correct... Thanks Gudge > 1. Call to order, roll call Steve takes roll and quorom is achieved. Attendance of Voting Members Gene Thurston AmberPoint Hal Lockhart BEA Corinna Witt BEA Thomas DeMartini ContentGuard Guillermo Lao ContentGuard Merlin Hughes Cybertrust Tim Moses Entrust Carolina Canales-Valenzuela Ericsson Dana Kaufman Forum Systems Toshihiro Nishimura Fujitsu Kefeng Chen GeoTrust Irving Reid HP Kojiro Nakayama Hitachi Kelvin Lawrence IBM Mike McIntosh IBM Anthony Nadalin IBM Nataraj Nagaratnam IBM Ron Williams IBM Kate Cherry Lockheed Martin Paul Cotton Microsoft Vijay Gajjala Microsoft Martin Gudgin Microsoft Chris Kaler Microsoft Richard Levinson Netegrity Jeff Hodges NeuStar Frederick Hirsch Nokia Abbie Barbir Nortel Lloyd Burch Novell Steve Anderson OpenNetwork Vamsi Motukuru Oracle Ramana Turlapati Oracle Prateek Mishra Principal Identity Ben Hammond RSA Security Rob Philpott RSA Security Martijn de Boer SAP Pete Wenzel SeeBeyond Ronald Monzillo Sun Microsystems Symon Chang TIBCO John Weiland US Navy Phillip Hallam-Baker VeriSign Maneesh Sahu Westbridge Technology Attendance of Prospective Members Don Flinn Individual Membership Status Changes Irving Reid HP - Returned from LOA before 1/11/2005 call Frank Siebenlist Argonne National Lab - Lost voting status after 1/11/2005 call Don Flinn Individual - Granted voting status after 1/11/2005 call Larry Byrns IBM - Lost prospective status after 1/11/2005 call > 2. Reading/approving minutes of last meeting (14th December 2004) [1] Minutes of 2004-12-14 approved without objection. > 3. SWA Vote result. When do we want to start the Public review? [2] 38 yes, 4 abstain, 0 no 2/3 Yes vote, no more than 1/4 no achieved. SWA profile is approved as a committee draft. Moved by BEA\Hal that we start public review immediately. Seconded by IBM\Tony. No objection to so starting public review. Public review will start ASAP. ACTION: Chris and Kelvin to perform necessary administrative tasks to start public review of SWA profile. Lockheed Martin\Kate: All the abstains were Microsoft, does anyone from Microsoft want to make a comment? Microsoft\Paul: We don't see why anyone should HAVE to make a comment on the vote. IBM\Kelvin: OASIS staff are going to change the voting tool so that no/abstain votes can be made without having to comment. IBM\Kelvin: Thanks to Frederick et.al. for all technical and editorial work on the SWA profile. > 4. Status of 1.1 documents IBM\Kelvin: Needs some help from the editors getting the home page up to date with links to correct documents. Can editors give us an update on where we are with 1.1 IBM\Tony: We need to close some more issues before we can update the documents. > 5. Other document status (SwA, Kerberos,etc...) SWA, see section 3. Microsoft\Gudge: No movement on Kerberos. I will try to send an updated document this week. > 6. Issue list review Pending issues: Issue 84. BEA\Hal: My recollection was that we agreed to remove the Decryption Transform section. IBM\Tony; That was done, latest document has this changes Microsoft\Chris: Issue 84 is closed Issue 282. BEA\Hal: Looks OK to me. Microsoft\Chris: Issue 282 is closed Issue 330. Issue 331. Issue 332. Microsoft\Chris: Have the changes suggested by 330 been incorporated in the last update. IBM\Tony: I believe so, let me check. All have been posted. Microsoft\Chris: OK, 330, 331, 332 are closed Issue 347 IBM\Tony: Issue 350 Microsoft\Chris: 350 is closed. Issue 351/352 BEA\Hal: Proposals were posted before Christmas. No comments so far. Microsoft\Vijay: I'm going to send comments this week. Microsoft\Chris: These two stay as pending. Open Issues: Issue 250 Microsoft\Chris: I recall that there was concern about making such a change in 1.1 Sun\Ron: Requires a schema change (adding a URI). Microsoft\Chris: We have made backward compatible changes to schema. Sun\Ron: I believe this change can be made in a similar fashion. I thought Chris said we weren't releasing a new schema. Microsoft\Chris: I meant we don't want to break the schema. Contentguard\Thomas: There are different kinds of schema changes. Adding elements/attributes to an extensibility point doesn't necessarily break something. But if we're adding stuff where there was no extensibility point, or removing things then it's not a compatible change. Nokia\Frederick: Isn't it valuable to get this change in sooner rather than later. BEA\Hal: I agree. It's not clear to me whether there will be anything beyond 1.1. So I think it's do it now, or never do it. Sun\Ron: I concluded that we weren't making this level of schema change in 1.1. Microsoft\Chris: Issue title implies that we are moving an attribute. Sun\Ron: Proposal designed to not take anything away but to make sure you don't have to use internal overloaded values. ContentGuard\Thomas: I think there is a disconnect between what Ron just said and the latest proposal. Microsoft\Chris: I'd like to see mocked up document edits and then we can see what the changes are and get a feel for what the impact is (e.g. will there be possible conflicts if information appears in two places ) Sun\Ron: I think such a proposal has already been made. It was only one or two sentences added. One to advise against the use of an attribute in future profiles. Don: Last meeting everyone agreed this should be done. Only question was whether to do it in 1.1 or some later spec. ContentGuard\Thomas: Reads Ron's e-mail proposal ...Discussion between Ron, Thomas et.al. on what the proposal says... ContentGuard\Thomas: Maybe we should write up the changes required to each of the token profiles. Microsoft\Chris: I'd like to see us define what it means if both attributes are present. Sun\Ron: I would say that only one attribute SHOULD appear. Microsoft\Chris: But if you only allow one ( the new one) , how do you indicate the reference type? Microsoft\Chris (paraphrasing Ron): If they're both specified, they must be consistent, otherwise it's an error. Sun\Ron: I could go along with that. If you specify both attributes, the token type has to be consistent with the value type. Microsoft\Chris: I propose we get an updated proposal sent to the list that captures the above. I'd like to see us vote on this at the next meeting. Contentguard\Thomas: I'm not comfortable voting until I see the changes to the 1.1 token profiles. Microsoft\Chris: We don't know that there will be any impact. If we decided not to rev the profiles, we can write up the impact. ..Some discussion between Chris, Ron and Thomas about impact and schema changes. Microsoft\Chris: Ron needs to amend his proposal as above and to modify the language so that it doesn't say that the attribute is deprecated, but rather is deprecated as a way of indicating the token type ( rather than the reference type ). ACTION: Ron to produce updated proposal. Based on above minutes. Contentguard\Thomas: I'm not happy voting on this until I've seen the text. Microsoft\Chris: The TC seems to be OK with having a vote on the next call. There may be such a vote. Issue 310. Microsoft\Vijay: Not yet done. Microsoft\Chris: Leave 310 open Issue 338: BEA\Hal: No progress yet Microsoft\Chris: Leave open Issue 349 Sun\Ron: Don't want to prohibit ReferenceList. Agreement was reached but doc not updated. Nokia\Frederick: I'll make that update. Microsoft\Chris: Move to pending. Issue 353 Microsoft\Chris: 353 is closed ( we have added new schema elements in 1.1 ) Issue 354 Sun\Ron: I've added text to make the point clear but apparently is hasn't helped. I've sent mail to the commentators but not heard back. I've fixed the typos. Microsoft\Chris: Looks like we have a SAML Profile 1.1 ( due to corrections to typos ). Sun\Ron: I'm not sure we'd create a 1.1 just for the typos. Sun\Ron: I've prepared a SAML 2.0 profile, I have a draft that supports SAML 1.1 and 2.0. I'd like to have that be the next version of the SAML Token Profile. BEA\Hal: We should create an 'errata fixed' document first, then worry about a second document. Microsoft\Chris: I don't think there would be objections to including SAML 2.0 in a future SAML Token profile. BEA\Hal: SAML 2.0 will become an OASIS standard next month. Neustar\Jeff: Still need to figure out how to deprecate older specs. Next version of SAML Token Profile should support 1.1 and 2.0, need to then deprecate the 1.1 only SAML Token Profile spec. BEA\Hal: Why is it necessary to deprecate the spec? Neustar\Jeff: Because then people only have to go to one document to know about 1.1 and 2.0. Sun\Ron: Combined document will be the 1.1 document, plus the 2.0 stuff. If you wanted 1.1 support, you could look at either document. Microsoft\Chris: Mark 354 as pending. Editors to create an errata for SAML 1.1 Token Profile. ACTION: Editors to create an errata for SAML 1.1 Token Profile. > 7. Interop events status Kerberos Interop: Microsoft\Chris: One party has an endpoint up, but no date for event yet. Gudge is working on a date for the interop event. > 8. Remaining business for 2005 IBM\Kelvin: We need to work on the Minimalist Profile. BEA\Hal: Biometric token profile? Microsoft\Chris: We'd need someone to champion that work. BEA\Hal: Not clear to me how you use Biometric for Sig/Enc IBM\Kelvin: So current work is 1.1, Kerberos Token Profile, SWA Profile and then Minimalist Profile in that order. And Kerberos completes our requirements for WS-I BSP. BEA\Hal: WS-I BSP will probably profile everything that comes out of this TC. IBM\Kelvin: So that's our work for the first quarter ish of this year? BEA\Hal: Well, there are other specs that are in this space that will be going into standards orgs at some point. > 9. Other business No other business. > 10. Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 08:10am PST
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]