Re: [ekmi] is this TC dead?

[Anil Saldhana <Anil.Saldhana@redhat.com>]

Benjamin Tomhave wrote:
> Ha, well. If we could have meetings once in a while, I might actually make
> it back to Voting Member status... ;)
>
>   
We did not hold a May meeting because I was sick. :(  It is not the 
first time that EKMI TC
has missed monthly meetings.  Unfortunately, I did a bad job at 
notifying the TC (something I am
learning as a co-chair to rectify).

> In all seriousness, I'm not 100% convinced that this committee should
> exist, at least not as it's currently defined and designed... IF you were
> to accept that KMIP will be the de facto binary standard, and IF you
> accept that .3 will deploy an XML standard that directly correlates to
> KMIP, THEN it does not seem to make sense to continue down this XML
> standard path. Why build a competing standard when it will not have the
> necessary big-vendor backing to achieve prevalence, and thus success?
>   
There is at least one compelling usage of EKMI in the SOA world (with 
the usage of ws-security,
xml signature and xml encryption supplementing strong pki).  That is 
sufficient reason for me to
continue the work of EKMI.  EKMI is solving the "data at play" problem 
rather than
the "data at rest" concept predominant in the storage area. It is a 
layer 7 standard.

Only time will tell whether EKMI exists as a TC or not. At this time, 
this TC is being led by representatives
from 2 reputed public companies. :) We just had a jolt with leading TC 
representatives quitting - so we need time to regroup
and catch the pace again.

I think the TC still welcomes suggestions for improvement. Maybe we will 
see more email messages that way on the list.

> EKMI conceptually is very good. Assuming the protocol standards are
> "handled," where can we then add value? I think this is a question that
> should be seriously and soberly discussed. As it stands today, we appear
> to lack adequate backing.
>   
Value add exists in the development of audit guidelines, standard API 
and a rock solid compatibility test suite as a start.
> fwiw.
>
> -ben
>
> On Mon, June 15, 2009 6:16 pm, Anil Saldhana wrote:
>   
>> Hi Ben,
>>   the work done is here:
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ekmi/sksml/v1.0/pr01/SKSML-1.0-Specification.html
>>
>> What is needed is to get to the 3 implementations whose conformance will
>> drive the 1.0 specification to public standard....  :)
>>
>> The odds may be stacked at us. It does not mean we are in a rat race to
>> get to public standard. For that to happen, we need conforming
>> implementations.
>>
>> I do recommend you to take up an official role with EKMI (maybe a second
>> secretary?) or an editor role to actually move this TC forward.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Anil
>>
>> Benjamin Tomhave wrote:
>>     
>>> No visual project in nearly 2 months while other committees in the same
>>> realm is hardly sensationalizing. ;) If this committee wants to survive
>>> and be taken seriously, then serious work must be conducted. Or, the
>>> committee should just concede loss and fold. As it is, the odds are
>>> strongly stacked against us under the current strategy. If we cannot get
>>> all the major players onboard and actively engaged, then we need to take
>>> stock of the work being done and decide whether or not what we're doing
>>> is
>>> the right thing.
>>>
>>> fwiw.
>>>
>>> -ben
>>>
>>> On Mon, June 15, 2009 5:25 pm, Anil Saldhana wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> I was going to send an email soon (not on the death of the TC) but with
>>>> updates.
>>>>
>>>> I am still learning - do not procrastinate sending emails in this
>>>> global
>>>> world. :)
>>>>
>>>> While you are at it, can you tell me why you derive such immense
>>>> pleasure in sensationalizing things via emails? ;)
>>>>
>>>> Benjamin Tomhave wrote:
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm just wondering... there's been no activity on the main list here
>>>>> since
>>>>> April. I've not seen anything on a monthly call. Is there anything
>>>>> going
>>>>> on? Or is this TC dead. If it's dead, then perhaps someone should
>>>>> alert
>>>>> OASIS so that they can call the coroner for cleanup.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>
>>>>> -ben
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>