[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [xcbf] Initial drafts of all deliverables
Yuck - does this mean we are in a copyright minefield in using anything from X9.84? John L Phil Griffin wrote: > > John, > > Only the template format for X9.84 was changed to > meet ISO requirements when it was submitted for > fast track ballot. The fast track ballot has closed > and the issue failed. > > This result is widely attributed in the US to be due > to an orchestrated attack by the (UK) chair of SC17, > who was trying to gather all biometric standardization > under control of his card group. This even though > X9.84 has far wider applicability than cards. > > SC 17 rebuffed offers from TC 68 to work jointly on > progressing the US national standard, and twice sent > out letters to its SC17 members with influence over > or voting rights in TC68 containing suggested voting > text that asked that the 21352 ballot be defeated and > the document transposed to SC17. > > Almost all of the negative votes against 21352 contained > this negative recommended text. But X9F has now voted to > not provide SC17 or its US tag with any access to X9.84 > and has cautioned that the document is copyrighted. The > response of TC68/SC2 will be determined by the SC2 > members at their next meeting in April. > > Meanwhile, the US has formed a new TC in the INCITS > organization named M1 Biometrics and has asked that > JTC1 create a new SC for all biometric standards and > that M1 serve as the US tag. Work earmarked in the US > for SC17 in B10 has been moved now to M1. > > And of course, the OASIS XCBF work has now started. And > it will extend the current capabilities of X9.84, suggest > changes to the ASN.1 in X9.84, and attempt to align that > standard with the BioAPI BIR format. > > As a voting member of X9, I have been advocating that the > X9.84 standard be proposed again as a NWI for normal track > processing. If this could be done, I would wish to try to > augment the current X9.84 document to reflect the work in > XCBF. But there's a lot of politics involved and the way > forward is unclear. > > Not closely related, but BTW. I have recently been named > vice chair of TC68/SC2, and I will continue to serve as > Convenor of the SC2/WG8 PKI group. > > Phil > > John Larmouth wrote: > > > > If I have not misunderstood, ISO DIS 21352 is the ISO equivalent of > > X9.84. > > > > If that is so, then: > > > > 1) Surely we should be using THAT as our base, not X9.84? > > > > 2) When does the DIS ballot close? > > > > John L > > > > John L > > > > Phil Griffin wrote: > > > > > > John, > > > > > > The timing was set to give us a chance to iron > > > out problems that might arise before our due > > > dates for deliverables. > > > > > > I recall though that we had not decided at time > > > of TC request whether to have the May 16 meeting > > > as a face to face or by telephone. I think that > > > at the time, just you and Bancroft and Paul and > > > I were in the conversation, and we had no way > > > of knowing how to judge what the interest level > > > in the work might be. > > > > > > BTW. If you look back at your mail, you'll find > > > I've placed copies of the BioAPI document and > > > the NIST CBEFF document on my web site (as I > > > could not post it to the XCBF web site). These > > > will be moved to the XCBF web site this weekend. > > > > > > X9.84 is still only available from the ansi.org > > > electronic bookstore. > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > John Larmouth wrote: > > > > > > > > Are we seriously considering a *one-day* meeting on May 16th? > > > > (Anywhere). I don't currently have this in my diary. It was my > > > > understanding that the XCBF would normally be meeting alongside other > > > > meetings the majority of us were attending (such as the Barcelona UBL > > > > meeting, or perhaps the joint UBL and X.12 meeting in early June. > > > > > > > > I suggest it is better to try to progress things electronically, and the > > > > crucial first step is to get all relevant documents mailed out. > > > > > > > > John L > > > > > > > > Phil Griffin wrote: > > > > > > > > > > When I requested the TC, I was required to specify a > > > > > meeting schedule for the first year. OSS agreed to > > > > > host the first meeting and provide everyone with > > > > > the ability to dial in. > > > > > > > > > > OSS also agreed to host at their place in Somerset, > > > > > NJ May 16, 2002. Bancroft, are you still game or > > > > > would you prefer to open this up for discussion? > > > > > > > > > > I'm giving an XCBF pitch at the ITU-T Workshop on > > > > > Security in Seoul, Korea on the 13th and 14th. So, > > > > > I'll be flying back after this in order to make > > > > > the meeting. Flying back to California instead of > > > > > NJ would allow my brain to catch up to my body a > > > > > little quicker. > > > > > > > > > > But some of the folks that helped to plan the TC > > > > > and get it started may have already made plans. > > > > > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > > > > > Tyky Aichelen wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Forwarded by Tyky Aichelen/San Jose/IBM on 03/29/02 11:32 AM ----- > > > > > > > > > > > > Tyky Aichelen > > > > > > To: Paul Thorpe <thorpe@oss.com> > > > > > > 03/29/02 11:13 AM cc: > > > > > > From: Tyky Aichelen/San Jose/IBM@IBMUS > > > > > > Subject: Re: [xcbf] Initial drafts of all deliverables(Document link: Tyky > > > > > > Aichelen) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Great! So we have Paul and I among the volunteering hosts, on West and East > > > > > > coasts. > > > > > > It would be nice if we can map out tentative Face-to-Face schedule for the > > > > > > rest of 2002, > > > > > > since people would need planning ahead and time for travel request approval > > > > > > which can > > > > > > be lengthy in some companies. > > > > > > Yes, I agree, we wait and make suggestions to Phil. > > > > > > Phil, where are you? Are you back yet from Barcelona? > > > > > > > > > > > > Tyky. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Paul Thorpe > > > > > > <thorpe@oss.com> To: xcbf <xcbf@lists.oasis-open.org> > > > > > > cc: > > > > > > 03/29/02 10:59 AM Subject: Re: [xcbf] Initial drafts of all deliverables > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Tyky Aichelen wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Team, > > > > > > > Happy upcoming Easter to you all! > > > > > > > It is is quiet out there! If we want to meet our stated deadline of May > > > > > > 30 > > > > > > > for "Initials drafts of all deliverables", we need to get going. > > > > > > > When is our mtg #2? To speed up, we may consider to meet in persons in a > > > > > > > one-or-two-full-day session to agree on the skeletons of those initial > > > > > > > drafts, and nail them down in writing. Once agreed and written down, we > > > > > > can > > > > > > > divide up the chapters writing work, assignable to each of us. This one, > > > > > > we > > > > > > > can do it, each at our own pace and location. > > > > > > > I can be the host for our next face-to-face mtg, if you, folks, do not > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > traveling to IBM site in San Jose (Northern California). > > > > > > > Does anyone have an alternative? > > > > > > > > > > > > OSS can also host face-to-face meetings in Somerset, NJ, but I expected > > > > > > much of the initial work to be done via email and conference calls. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am polling to see how many of us in XCBF are interested in quartely > > > > > > > face-to-face working sessions and can travel. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have no problem traveling when we do need face-to-face sessions. I will > > > > > > wait for a response from Phil Griffin to indicate his proposed meeting > > > > > > schedule in order to meet the deadlines. > > > > > > > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > Tyky Aichelen > > > > > > > OASIS XCBF TC member. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > > > > > > > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > > > > > > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > > > > > > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > > > > > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Prof John Larmouth > > > > Larmouth T&PDS Ltd > > > > (Training and Protocol Development Services) > > > > 1 Blueberry Road > > > > Bowdon j.larmouth@salford.ac.uk > > > > Cheshire WA14 3LS Tel: +44 161 928 1605 > > > > England Fax: +44 161 928 8069 > > > > -- > > Prof John Larmouth > > Larmouth T&PDS Ltd > > (Training and Protocol Development Services) > > 1 Blueberry Road > > Bowdon j.larmouth@salford.ac.uk > > Cheshire WA14 3LS Tel: +44 161 928 1605 > > England Fax: +44 161 928 8069 > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> -- Prof John Larmouth Larmouth T&PDS Ltd (Training and Protocol Development Services) 1 Blueberry Road Bowdon j.larmouth@salford.ac.uk Cheshire WA14 3LS Tel: +44 161 928 1605 England Fax: +44 161 928 8069
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC