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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

openc2 message

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


Subject: RE: [openc2] Subcommittee Reorganization - for/against/neither


I agree with Vasileios.  Unless there is some compelling reason for reorganization beyond time effectiveness, sharing meeting times would seem to be a good compromise position.

 

Dan

 

From: openc2@lists.oasis-open.org <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org> On Behalf Of Vasileios Mavroeidis
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2020 7:53 AM
To: jmbrule@radium.ncsc.mil
Cc: Vasileios Mavroeidis <vasileim@ifi.uio.no>; duncan sfractal.com <duncan@sfractal.com>; OASIS OpenC2 List <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: Re: [openc2] Subcommittee Reorganization - for/against/neither

 

I would keep the organizational structure the way it is. I donât think that re-organization will foster higher participation right now, but I do understand that having one group will allow more people to stay in the loop by aggregating them all together at this point . I would say keep separation of concerns but merge the meetings. So the LS-SC and the IC-SC should meet together and have a common agenda (for an indefinite period).

 

 

-Vasileios



On 24 Feb 2020, at 13:25, Brule, Joseph M <jmbrule@radium.ncsc.mil> wrote:

 

Willing to go along with it either way. 

 

From: duncan sfractal.com <duncan@sfractal.com> 
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2020 8:29 AM
To: Brule, Joseph M <jmbrule@radium.ncsc.mil>; OASIS OpenC2 List <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Subcommittee Reorganization - for/against/neither

 

It would be very helpful to understand what more people think about the reorganization. Please respond with where you are on the issue. Are you strongly for it, for it, strongly against it, against it, willing to go along with the majority either way, donât really care, other thoughts?

 

My concern is my standards experience tells me that most people will keep quiet on issues like this and vote yes because they trust the leadership. In this case the leadership is divided. Being honest, I happen to be against the reorganization for the reasons Iâve stated in all my other emails, slack message, etc. So the âvote yesâ because everyone votes yes hurts my case and therefore Iâm trying to distinguish between the ânot raising objectionâ and the âactually forâ.

 

It would be very useful to get more input â even if you say âI really donât careâ.

 

Duncan Sparrell

sFractal Consulting LLC

iPhone, iTypo, iApologize

I welcome VSRE emails. Learn more at http://vsre.info/

 

 

From: TC OpenC2 <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Joseph Brule <jmbrule@radium.ncsc.mil>
Date: Friday, February 21, 2020 at 1:09 PM
To: TC OpenC2 <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [openc2] Subcommittee Reorganization 

 

All, 

 

A reorganization of the subcommittees was proposed during the January 2020 TC meeting.  The purpose of this email is to present the resolution, provide background information and initiate deliberations on the topic.  Once the deliberations are complete, Dave Lemire will generate an electronic ballot in accordance with the direction provided by the TC during the February TC meeting. 

 

NOTE:  Review the deliberations and if you believe that I did not capture the point correctly in the summary of the deliberations then provide the correction and/or provide additional points.  If there is an error, then accept that it was an honest mistake on my part.  

 

FURTHER NOTE:  SLACK messages are not available to all our members. I will attempt to transfer any SLACK messages to the oasis email relay, but it is preferred if you use this email as the medium for deliberations. 

 

RESOLVED:  The OpenC2 Technical Committee shall form a new subcommittee to be known as the âLanguage and Architecture Subcommitteeâ.  Upon formation of the new subcommittee, the âLanguage Subcommitteeâ and the âImplementation Considerations Subcommitteeâ shall transfer their activities to the new subcommittee.  

 

  Background

         A proposal to transfer the activities of the LSC and ICSC to a new SC was proposed during the January Monthly TC

         The general consensus was to revisit the issue after the Plug Fest and email deliberations

         Objections were raised during the February Monthly TC meeting. 

         There was general consensus with the approach of continuing the deliberations via email and upon conclusion of the email deliberations a decision will be made via electronic ballot. 

  After the Plug Fest, the proposed new subcommittee was brought up via email.

         The net effect is to combine the LSC and ICSC into a single subcommittee

         The AP SC will maintain its current tempo and leadership

         Objections to the proposal were made known via email on Feb 18, 2020.

  Summary of Deliberations

         Statement FOR

         Level of effort required to revise and maintain is substantially less than the initial draft

         The scope of the LSC and IC-SC are at a 'systems' or âarchitecturalâ level while the scope of the AP-SC is at a 'component' level therefore logical to combine the 'system' or 'architectural' tasks in one subcommittee and the 'component' tasks in a separate subcommittee

         The results of the Plug Fest seem to validate the proposal in that the vast majority of the issues identified were component level

         Statement AGAINST

         Should retain separate subcommittees to retain their focus and maintain separation of concerns

         Several (structured) subcommittees permit attendees to focus their attention on their areas of interest and expertise and avoid diluting the meeting.

         Rebuttal to the statement AGAINST

         No rebuttal offered

         Rebuttal to the statement FOR

         The reduced workload is more appropriately addressed by changing the cadence of the meeting rather than broaden the scope of the subcommittee. 

         Do not agree that the current Language and IC-SC are more similar to each other, in fact [one individual] thinks that the AP-SC has more in common with the LSC than the IC-SC.  

 

 

Joe Brule

Engineering (Y2D122)

FNX-3, B4A335

410.854.4045

'Adnius ad retinedam puritem noster peciosus corporalis fluidorumâ'

I welcome VSRE emails.  Learn more at http://vsre.info/

 



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