OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

emergency message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [emergency] Re: [sia-pilot6] [emergency] EDXL-DE routing andvalueListUrn


At 10:14 AM -0700 3/21/06, Carl Reed OGC Account wrote:
>What he said . . .
>And this also gets to the issue we discussed in the IF SC call 
>today. There is considerable misunderstanding and need for education 
>in the market place regarding the use and implementation of EDXL. 
>Part of this education is that EDXL is a transport mechanism and 
>must/can be viewed as independent from the technology implementation 
>infrastructure. It should not matter if the enterprise (in the 
>virtual sense) is implementing against a middleware bus, using 
>SOAP/WSDL/UDDI, using ebRIM/XML, using an OGC Catalog, using the 
>COMCARE EPAD application, using Java enterprise beans, etc. I view 
>EDXL as technology implementation neutral - as it should be.
>Am I wrong in thinking this?
>Also, my previous email was more about making sure that the 
>discussions in the EM TC on EDXL do not totally go totally US 
>DHS/DoD centric. I understand the immediate requirement but we 
>cannot loose sight of the bigger picture. For example, I would love 
>to be able to recommend EDXL to ORCHESTRA in Europe.
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Rex Brooks" <rexb@starbourne.com>
>To: "SIA Pilot-6" <sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net>; "Carl Reed OGC 
>Account" <creed@opengeospatial.org>; <emergency@lists.oasis-open.org>
>Cc: "Haleftiras, Pericles" <phaleftiras@systechnologies.com>; 
>"Glaser, Ronald" <rfglase@sandia.gov>
>Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 5:33 PM
>Subject: [emergency] Re: [sia-pilot6] [emergency] EDXL-DE routing 
>and valueListUrn
>>I don't think Carl misunderstood that different valueListUrns are 
>>possible. Of course, I could be wrong, but I doubt it. I think 
>>Carl's concern is that some people may think that Dave's proposal 
>>was for a single valueListUrn. I do not think Dave is doing that. I 
>>think Dave is responding to the call for various groups to start 
>>producing, publishing and maintaining these necessary valueListUrns 
>>so that we can start using them in EDXL_DE routed messages.
>>All of the international groups and constituencies mentioned need 
>>to be informed that it is now incumbent upon them to provide these 
>>semantic resources so that their systems, be they SensorNets or 
>>weatherAlerts, can be properly connected through our Emergency 
>>Response Networks.
>>At 5:00 PM -0700 3/20/06, Ellis, David wrote:
>>>Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
>>>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>>>All of scenarios you have proposed could use seperate valueListUrn 
>>>to control distribution of data within defined Area of 
>>>Responsiblities.  If transfer of data is needed between these 
>>>AORs, methods for exchanging messages are avaiable.  When can we 
>>>talk about this.  I believe all of your domain issues are 
>>>potential misunderstandings how routing is accomplished.
>>>David E. Ellis
>>>Information Management Architect
>>>(505) 844-6697
>>>From: Carl Reed OGC Account [mailto:creed@opengeospatial.org]
>>>Sent: Mon 3/20/2006 4:20 PM
>>>To: Ellis, David; SIA Pilot-6; emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
>>>Cc: Harry Haury; Haleftiras, Pericles; Glaser, Ronald
>>>Subject: Re: [emergency] EDXL-DE routing and valueListUrn
>>>David -
>>>While I understand the urgency and while I do not necessarily disagree with
>>>the contents of your slides on a National Effort for Emergency Data
>>>Distribution, I would like to add a few words of caution.
>>>First, what you have outlined are uses cases and requirements for one domain
>>>of use - alerts as related to secure US DoD sensor nets. I deal with folks
>>>doing sensor systems and networks in a number of other countries - all
>>>civilian. Any of these applications using sensors can create alerts. For
>>>example, a new water portal in Canada that will send alerts based on stream
>>>flow gauges, traffic alerts being generated by the new generation of ITS
>>>capabilities, weather alerts, and systems function alerts being generated by
>>>transducers, and so forth. We cannot loose sight of all the other potential
>>>use cases that drives the requirements for EDXL - now and in the future.
>>>Second, and related to the first, is the fact that OASIS is an international
>>>standards organization. As such, we cannot ignore requirements for using
>>>EDXL that may be extremely viable in other countries. It is unfortunate that
>>>we have had little input from organizations in other countries that have
>>>requirements similar to the US DoD. That is why I am very pleased with the
>>>progress of the Sensor Standards Harmonization work that NIST is
>>>Third, we would be remiss in ignoring the potential for alerts coming from
>>>the emerging sensor nets being designed, built, and fairly recently deployed
>>>for home systems and office buildings (office sensor networks are much more
>>>mature). See 
>>>well as all the work being done at UCLA (SOS) and Sun (SUN SPOT). These
>>>systems are envisioned as being able to automatically generate alerts (fire,
>>>carbon monoxide, health, etc).
>>>Finally, and anyone (someone) correct me if I am wrong, but perhaps the
>>>COMCARE EPAD system would be a repository/registry solution.
>>>So, I agree that current DHS and DoD requirements are very valid and those
>>>requirements must be answered by EDXL. But let's make sure we remain
>>>balanced in our approach so that other communities outside DoD and DHS are
>>>also fairly represented at that CAP and EDXL have used well beyond.
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Ellis, David" <dellis@sandia.gov>
>>>To: "SIA Pilot-6" <sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net>;
>>>Cc: "Harry Haury" <hhaury@nuparadigm.com>; "Haleftiras, Pericles"
>>><phaleftiras@systechnologies.com>; "Glaser, Ronald" <rfglase@sandia.gov>
>>>Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 10:11 AM
>>>Subject: [emergency] EDXL-DE routing and valueListUrn
>>>I have a reasonably mature strategy for creating valueListUrn lists and
>>>how they can be used to deploy a national architecture for Alerting and
>>>Warning.  I have been trying to develop this to support Chips Disaster
>>>Management efforts (e.g. EDXL-RM) and to allow for national sensor
>>>capabilities (e.g. DNDO) to have the EDXL-DE routing system (execution
>>>context) which provides the following capabilities:
>>>1. Allow for establishment of Communities of Interest (COIs) where
>>>appropriate authority can establish roles of entities, information
>>>routing rules between them and issue certificate to ensure
>>>authentication and authorization.
>>>2. Permit interaction between COIs to instantiate robust MOUs enforced
>>>by execution context allowing creation of national information grid.
>>>3. Permit secure delivery of multiple levels of sensitive information
>>>via signing, encryption and labeling within the EDXL-DE.
>>>4. Allow abstraction of the implementation details (what) so national
>>>planners can implement various operational concepts (documented in
>>>DoDAF, FEA etc.) with minimal confusion on "how" it is accomplished.
>>>I have tried to engage NIEM for over one year to explain these concepts
>>>without success.  There is finally understanding between the various
>>>standards organization on how important this is to major government
>>>implementations.  On the other hand, major information providers are
>>>claim our capabilities either don't exist or have never been
>>>demonstrated.  Both are not true and in fact the EDXL-DE is being used
>>>in an operational system within the DoD.  Unfortunately, it is not
>>>branded as EDXL-DE since we have not issued the EDXL-DE OASIS standard
>>>I need as many of the organization implementing EDXL-DE to attempt
>>>sending outputs from your applications to the developing EDXL-DE routing
>>>capability at NuParadigm in Saint Louis or our capability at Sandia
>>>National Laboratories.  Also, a generic ability to wrap CAP messages in
>>>EDXL has been created and we need to discuss the security implications
>>>of doing this from local applications or by the "execution context" for
>>>legacy/warning-only CAP applications.
>>>I need to be able to list all the capabilities of your applications even
>>>if they use explicated routing (e.g. DMIS COGs) and have no security
>>>capability.  The design of our governments emerging national
>>>capabilities is moving at lighting speed and EDXL-DE capabilities needs
>>>to be a substantial portion of it.  Attached are two briefings present
>>>this past week on sensor routing.
>>>David E. Ellis
>>>Information Management Architect
>>>(505) 844-6697
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: sia-pilot6-bounces@humanml.cim3.net
>>>On Behalf Of Elysa Jones
>>>Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 11:23 AM
>>>To: Rex Brooks
>>>Cc: sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net
>>>Subject: Re: [sia-pilot6] [emergency] EDXL-DE Committee Draft
>>>Yes, that is a good point.  I too want us to start coming up with these
>>>"managed lists" knowing full well that NIEM wont be providing us
>>>in the near term.  I had thought too that we could use the event list,
>>>incident type, etc. that were provided in the original draft hand off as
>>>starting place.  Maybe we should put these in examples and put them in
>>>cookbook?  I too think the Govt agencies will not step up to this for
>>>time and I am glad the registry is being developed in the pilot.  We do
>>>need another company though that can sign up for the "use" for the
>>>committee specification phase.  I seem to be focused most these days on
>>>jumping through the hoops for ratification.  Regards, Elysa
>>>At 10:07 AM 2/25/2006, Rex Brooks wrote:
>>>>Just to clarify, it isn't DMIS or IEM that needs to have a keyword/list
>>>>place, but they do need to be using some values in those fields that
>>>>be recognized and used by all of us, or by others that need and have
>>>>permissions to do so. We didn't address that level of permissions, and
>>>>doubt that anyone will start restricting these initial efforts, but it
>>>>another place where security measures can be imposed if appropriate,
>>>>since our pilot is building a registry where these pointers or the
>>>>resources can reside, I wanted to mention it.  While I want to be fair
>>>>gov agencies, I suspect they will have a more difficult time getting
>>>>funding resources, considering the Congress' recent actions with regard
>>>>"any" already approved E-Gov program movement of monies preparatory to
>>>>actual spending, the chances are good that what the organizations in
>>>>TC actually produce will be the default system for quite some time to
>>>>come, so I want to suggest to everyone that they bear that in mind and
>>>>approach work going forward in the next six months or so as if this
>>>>be all the system there will be for the next year. Once what we build
>>>>shows that it works, then I suspect there will quickly be a wealth of
>>>>resources available.
>>>>At 4:12 AM -0600 2/25/06, Elysa Jones wrote:
>>>>>Hey Rex, Welcome back.  I hope your trip went well.  As for the 3
>>>>>of the EDXL-DE, I think Sandia, IEM and DMIS volunteered to make the
>>>>>statement about "use."  We wont be able to use Sandia though since
>>>>>has an individual membership.  I'll put a note out to the list shortly
>>>>>ask who will be our third and if there is any keywords they must have
>>>>>place.  Elysa
>>>>>At 10:15 PM 2/24/2006, Rex Brooks wrote:
>>>>>>Yes, this is all true,
>>>>>>However, we still need 3 member organizations to vouch that they
>>>>>>it as part of the move to an OASIS-wide vote, so we need to be
>>>implmenting it.
>>>>>>P.S. This means that we need to get an EventType Keyword/List and
>>>>>>Sender/Recipient Keybord/List, etc, published by the appropriate
>>>>>>>Hey Tim,
>>>>>>>Yes, the next TC call is 3/9.  Whether we pull it now and make a
>>>>>>>or wait until another round we could still not get it to a final
>>>>>>>vote until May given the calendar process requirements. The
>>>>>>>Draft has to be to OASIS for 5 business days before going to 15 day
>>>>>>>review and must be back from 15 day review, comments addressed,
>>>>>>>Committee Specification and back to OASIS by the 15th of the month
>>>>>>>prior to the ratification vote.  We are on a tight schedule for a
>>>>>>>the last 2 weeks of April even if we receive no substantive
>>>>>>>Thanks for your input,
>>>>>>>At 12:31 PM 2/22/2006, Tim Grapes wrote:
>>>>>>>>Do I correctly recall that our next TC meeting won't be conducted
>>>>>>>>March 9?  If so, I recommend we lay out our cards now in case
>>>anyone feels
>>>>>>>>the option to pull back and re-publish is warranted.
>>>>>>>>My input is that this is simply a typo that can be corrected after
>>>>>>>>15-day review.   However, if others feel the error truly is
>>>substantive, I
>>>>>>>>feel we should pull it back, make the correction, and republish
>>>>>>>>than incurring an additional 15-day public comment.
>>>>>>>>Tim Grapes
>>>>>>>>Evolution Technologies, Inc.
>>>>>>>>Disaster Management egov Initiative
>>>>>>>>Science and Technology Directorate/OIC
>>>>>>>>Department of Homeland Security
>>>>>>>>Office:  (703) 654-6075
>>>>>>>>Mobile:  (703) 304-4829
>>>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>From: Elysa Jones 
>>>>>>>>Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 1:06 PM
>>>>>>>>To: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
>>>>>>>>Subject: [emergency] EDXL-DE Committee Draft
>>>>>>>>TC Members,
>>>>>>>>As discussed on our call yesterday, there are a couple of issues
>>>with the
>>>>>>>>EDXL-DE that have been brought to light from within the TC.  We are
>>>>>>>>able to make any changes to the posted documents until after the 15
>>>>>>>>review.  That review is schedule to end March 4.  The only comments
>>>so far
>>>>>>>>have come from within the TC although I fully expect some comments
>>>as the
>>>>>>>>end draws near.  The most significant comment is the problem with
>>>>>>>>schema not matching the DOM.  The DOM is correct and the place most
>>>>>>>>look for understanding of what is presented.
>>>>>>>>I have discussed our situation with Mary McRae, our OASIS staff
>>>contact to
>>>>>>>>determine our most efficient method to proceed.  She said that if
>>>in the
>>>>>>>>mind of the TC, the schema would be considered non-normative, it
>>>could be
>>>>>>>>changed as any other typo or correction that is non-substantive
>>>after the
>>>>>>>>15-day review is complete.
>>>>>>>>If we do feel that the correction of the schema is substantive,
>>>>>>>>15-day comment period would be required.  In that case, we could
>>>pull the
>>>>>>>>current 15-day review, make the change and re-publish.  Or we could
>>>>>>>>until this period is over, make our corrections and re-post for
>>>>>>>>15-day review.  In either case, the document has to go to OASIS by
>>>>>>>>of the month prior to the month of the vote.  With a successful
>>>>>>>>review in this round, we will be able to submit to OASIS by the
>>>15th of
>>>>>>>>March and thus an OASIS wide vote the last 2 weeks of April.  A
>>>>>>>>15-day review no matter how it happens will postpone the OASIS wide
>>>>>>>>until the last 2 weeks of May.
>>>>>>>>That is where we stand now and there is no real need for a decision
>>>>>>>>point.  Please consider whether you feel the incorrect schema is
>>>>>>>>substantive or not and let me know the will of the TC as to how we
>>>>>>>>Elysa Jones
>>>>>>>>Chair, OASIS EM-TC
>>>>>>>>Engineering PRogram Manager
>>>>>>>>Warning Systems, Inc.
>>>>>>>>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC
>>>>>>>>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs
>>>>>>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>>>>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>>>>>>Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/266 - Release Date:
>>>>>>>>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>>>>>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>>>>>>Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/266 - Release Date:
>>>>>>>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>>>>>>>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs
>>>>>>Rex Brooks
>>>>>>President, CEO
>>>>>>Starbourne Communications Design
>>>>>>GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
>>>>>>Berkeley, CA 94702
>>>>>>Tel: 510-849-2309
>>>>Rex Brooks
>>>>President, CEO
>>>>Starbourne Communications Design
>>>>GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
>>>>Berkeley, CA 94702
>>>>Tel: 510-849-2309
>>>  _________________________________________________________________
>>>Message Archives: 
>>>To Post: 
>>>Shared Files: 
>>>CWE Portal: <http://humanml.cim3.net/>http://humanml.cim3.net/
>>>Community Wiki: <http://humanml.cim3.net/wiki/>http://humanml.cim3.net/wiki/
>>>>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>>>>  generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
>>>>  OASIS
>>>>  at:
>>>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>>>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
>>>  _________________________________________________________________
>>>Message Archives: http://humanml.cim3.net/forum/sia-pilot6/
>>>To Post: mailto:sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net
>>>Shared Files: http://humanml.cim3.net/file/work/project/sia-pilot6/
>>>CWE Portal: http://humanml.cim3.net/
>>>Community Wiki: http://humanml.cim3.net/wiki/
>>Rex Brooks
>>President, CEO
>>Starbourne Communications Design
>>GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
>>Berkeley, CA 94702
>>Tel: 510-849-2309
>>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS

Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-849-2309

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]