RE: [xacml] [Fwd: Re: [wss] TC for Policy in support of WSS and o theractivities]

["Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>]

Sorry, can't make it due to prior engagements.

In the past two weeks I have had people proposing meetings around this
stuff that if I attended all of them would involve 27,326 air miles, all
at two weeks notice or less.

My ten cents is that as I said at Redmond I believe that this problem is
lead by whatever decisions are made about the wider WS-Policy issues.
Give me a framework an the security issues fall out pretty easily. The
problem is the framework and that is one where I want to see the XML and
WSDL people at work on the problem.

		Phill

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ronald monzillo [mailto:ronald.monzillo@sun.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 4:19 PM
> To: xacml@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [xacml] [Fwd: Re: [wss] TC for Policy in support of WSS and
> other activities]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [wss] TC for Policy in support of WSS and other 
> activities
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 19:29:32 -0500
> From: ronald monzillo <ronald.monzillo@sun.com>
> To: "'Web Services Security'" <wss@lists.oasis-open.org>
> 
> This message contains the agenda for the policy meeting
> SUN will be hosting on Feb 21 at its Sun Burlington MA.
> campus.
> 
> This meeting will focus on the characterization of the
> policy related functionality required to support the
> interoperable use of mechanisms, including, but not
> limited to, the SOAP message security mechanisms being
> defined by the Web Services Security TC. The purpose of
> the meeting will be to capture these requirements in
> proposed charters for one or more open forums that will
> serve the industry by providing solutions to these
> important problems.
> 
> We intend to convene this meeting without requiring a
> pre-meeting legal agreement. The meeting will be a
> discussion of an important class of interoperability
> problems and will not attempt to craft or enhance a
> technical specification built on contributions from
> the attendees. No attendee should have any expectations
> regarding the confidentiality of the meeting, its contents,
> or its results. Each speaker must be responsible for what
> they choose to say, keeping in mind that no expectation of
> confidentiality should be presumed to apply to the statements
> they make.
> 
> We request that those who have not yet done so confirm their
> intentto attend or participate by teleconference so that we
> can reserve sufficient space and call-in capacity. We also
> encourage you to share this invitation with others who you
> feel may be interested or should participate. We will
> distribute call in details before the meeting.
> 
> The meeting will begin at 8:30 A.M. (EST) and end at
> about 5:30 P.M.
> 
> The following is the proposed Agenda:
> 
> 8:00-8:30 Continental Breakfast
> 
> 8:30-8:45 Welcome and Introductions
> 
> 8:45-9:00 Agenda Review and Refinement
> 
> 9:00-10:30 Use Cases and Example Scenarios
> 
>       What types of policy negotiation problems do we seek
>       solutions for?
> 
>       What is the nature of the interactions whose properties
>       are being negotiated?
> 
>       What is the relationship of the negotiation to
>       the interaction whose properties are being negotiated?
> 
>       Where in the interactions is there a need to apply
>       the policies of the various actors in an interaction?
> 
> 10:30-10:45 Break
> 
> 10:45-12:30 Detailed Problem Characterization and Decomposition
> 
>       Consideration of the following aspects and others
>       as appropriate.
> 
>       The distribution or other communication of
>       policy between interacting entities
> 
>       The grouping of related policy statements or the
>       composition of policy from smaller perhaps reusable
>       statment groups.
> 
>       The reconciliation of policy negotiation with
>       a layered processing model
> 
>       The need for a semantic model in which to
>       configure, manage, and interpret (including
>       in combination) groups of policy staments.
> 
>       The need to allow for (perhaps decentralized)
>       evolution of the policy framework or statement model.
> 
> 12:30-1:30 Lunch
> 
> 1:30-3:15 Presentation and collaborative development of
>      Work descriptions suitable for inclusion in the
>      charters of one or more forums.
> 
> 3:30-3:45 Break
> 
> 3:45-5:50 Charter Discussion
> 
>       What forums (eg. TCs), if any, do we perceive as the
>       appropriate host for a particular piece of work?
> 
>       Definition of next steps:
> 
>       How do we transfer problem description(s) to the
>       appropriate forums, including potentially by deciding
>       to charter a new forum?
> 
>       Discussion of forum specific requirements, collection
>       of advocates, sponsors, etc, to meet the requirements
>       of the standard organization.
> 
>

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: application/pkcs7-signature