XACML versions and ITU

[Jamie Clark <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>]

Good morning. I'm writing to inquire and provide information about
plans for future continued interoperability between the XACML TC and
the ITU panel (SG17) that endorsed XACML v2 in 2006.

At the institutional level, OASIS and ITU are discussing the
continuing maintenance of the various specs which we have shared
(resulting in concurrent official ITU-T Recommendation status), which
as you know includes SAML.

The ITU community generally expects that, as we version or update
standards with stable new releases, we will keep our strategic partner
in the loop, so to speak, by also submitting them forward.  Otherwise
we put other collaborative SDOs in a tough position, if  OASIS has
released, and tooling is out, creating user demand for a final vN+1,
but at a time when ISO, ITU or etc. only has the prior vN.  We think
that a number of our best standards have benefited greatly from ISO,
ITU, JTC1 or similar global de jure sanction, particularly in global
government adoption.  So we'd like to faithfully maintain those
partnerships, within the boundaries of our rules & what our members
support.

ITU SG17 has formally asked us for a statement of intent, and we
should reply in a clear manner, well in advance of ITU SG17's next
working plenary in April 2011.  .

In the case of XACML, we have a v3.0 set plus profiles, which have not
advanced to OASIS Standard status, the usual gating factor for
re-submission to external SDOs under our Liaison Policy.  Several new
members have joined the TC, perhaps raising the ease of collecting
statements of use and making an OS submission.

We also have the XSPA-XACML for Healthcare profile v1, approved as an
OASIS Standard in November 2009.  It might seem off to an external
constituency that we confer that highest level of approval, but do not
forward it to the other SDO collaboratively endorsing the work.  That
same comment would apply to any definitive stable published errata
applicable to v2.0.  Is there any reason *not* to share those
completed artifacts with ITU at this time?

The TC's views on this should be shared with ITU.  I will make myself
available at a TC teleconference (or whatever sort of e-mail or
similar remote exchange might work better) in order to seek input,
answer any questions that I can, and discuss this further.

Thanks for your time & attention on a tough constellation of issues.

Regards  Jamie

~ James Bryce Clark
~ General Counsel, OASIS
~ http://www.oasis-open.org/who/staff.php#clark  @JamieXML