Minutes 7 March TC Meeting

[William Parducci <bill@parducci.net>]

Time: 15:00 ET (GMT-0500)
 Tel: 513-241-0892

I.  Roll Call
  Voting Members
   Richard Hill
   Mohammad Jafari
   Steven Legg
   Rich Levinson
   Hal Lockhart (Chair)
   Bill Parducci (Chair, minutes)
   Remon Sinnema
   John Tolbert

  Members
   Richard Skedd

  Quorum: YES (8 of 11 - 72%)

  Approve Minutes:
   21 February 2013 TC Meeting
   APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

II. Adminstrivia
  Future TC meeting times
   Options (ET): 9:00am, 4:30pm, 5:00pm, 11:00pm
   TC has 24 hours to submit additional time proposals to Bill who will
   create a ballot on the Oasis site, duration one week. Format "vote
   against" poll. results will be used to update time of TC meetings
   going forward.

  Status EC-US/IPC Profiles
   Passed review for CS status. Ready for Attestations.

  Interop
   John: Demonstrated new technology, went well. Higher degree of
         interoperatbilty demonstrated over pervious years.
   Action Item: Hal will gather materials from interop, confirm
                approval to share and post demo materials.

   Oasis is asking for 2014 participation now. Any interested parties
   are encouraged to voice interest as soon as is feasible by posting
   to the list.
   John: A Profile for ISMAP would make for an interesting demo

  XACML v3.0 Issues and Errata
   Hal: There is an official process for errata. Main limitation is
        only releasable annually. The wiki is likely the best place to
        capture the errata. 

III. Issues

  REST Profile
   Stephen: Example in REST Profile in what response should be
            (non-normative). Remon explained that the text was
            speculative based upon assumptions of operation.
   Hal: suggest that there is a comment that highlights this
        understanding.

  Starter Document/Obligation Profile for Healthcare
   Mohammed: some of the Obligation material goes beyond the HC Profile.
             Those things should come out into a more general Profile
             and retain the HC specific content in a separate profile.
   Hal: suggested mechanism for ensuring consistency of version in the
        TC discussion

  Obligations
   Hal: It is important that our next foray into Obligations should
        drive semantics into a workable solution. TC members should
        start considering requirements. Hal offered that his preference
        is that the PDP remain unchanged in Obligation processing.
        Perhaps PDP changes could be considered later. Use cases that
        would not allow for this requested. Finally, the relationship
        between Policy processing and Obligation need to be revisited
        to address Obligations that are part of Policies dropped during
        evaluation.
   Mohammed: Combining algorithms seem to ignore Obligations.
   Bill: There are some old discussions re: Obligations on the wiki for
         those interested in looking at the historical discussions.


  XACML v3.0 - multiple category elements, normative ambiguity?
   Rich: There seems to be a level of ambiguity in the evaluation that
         has ramifications on Obligations.
   Hal: Please post any such finding so that we can explore it

meeting adjourned.