RE: Embarrassing episode with conference call

[Hal Lockhart <hal.lockhart@entegrity.com>]

Actually if I was going to take offense it would because Netegrity does not
take my organization seriously as a competitor! ;-) However, apparently a
lot of other people are in the same boat with me.

Hal

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Darren Platt [mailto:dplatt@securant.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 2:23 PM
> To: stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie; Hal Lockhart
> Cc: 'Chanliau, Marc'; Eve L. Maler;
> security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: Embarrassing episode with conference call
> 
> 
> Marc, et. al.,
> 
> For the record, I think this issue was caused by an innocent 
> mistake made by
> the people/processes at the concall org. (not Netegrity), and 
> that it can
> and will be simply resolved.  No apology is necessary.
> 
> When I spoke with a supervisor at the concall org. that 
> morning, she told me
> that there was a comment in the 'owner' field that applied to 
> all Netegrity
> calls - saying to exclude certain competitors as a policy for 
> its company's
> calls (certainly a reasonable policy).  I don't think the person who
> established that policy is likely to have known about our calls.
> 
> I don't feel that there is currently any need to change the 
> current concall
> arrangements from a 'fairness' standpoint.  If however, it 
> makes sense to
> share costs, we would certainly be happy to contribute.  Even 
> if it means
> drinking beer ;~).
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Darren
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stephen Farrell [mailto:stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 9:03 AM
> > To: Hal Lockhart
> > Cc: 'Chanliau, Marc'; Eve L. Maler;
> > security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: Re: Embarrassing episode with conference call
> >
> >
> >
> > Hal, Marc,
> >
> > I'm sure you're right Hal, and this is just a hangover from
> > some previous conf. call instruction. As to costs: I'm not sure
> > how we could share 'em, unless we rotate or oasis have some
> > scheme. (Maybe we can buy Marc & Prateek lots of beer at all
> > the F2F meetings:-)
> >
> > Stephen.
> >
> > Hal Lockhart wrote:
> > >
> > > Personally I have no concerns and I am probably as 
> sensitive to this as
> > > anybody. I believe this is the service Netegrity uses
> > internally. I suspect
> > > that the instructions may have been given for some 
> Netegrity internal
> > > concall where they (quite legitimately) wanted to make 
> sure to exclude
> > > competitors. Somehow these instructions got applied to our call.
> > >
> > > Marc raises a good point. I would hate to see one party get
> > stuck with the
> > > tab forever. Maybe the companies could cover the cost on a
> > rotating basis.
> > > We would certainly be glad to pay for some of them.
> > >
> > > Hal
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Chanliau, Marc [mailto:MChanliau@netegrity.com]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 11:10 AM
> > > > To: Eve L. Maler; Chanliau, Marc;
> > > > security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > > Cc: elm@east.sun.com
> > > > Subject: RE: Embarrassing episode with conference call
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Wow!!!! I was not aware of this. I sure apologize, although
> > > > I'm not sure for
> > > > what. Just thinking that Netegrity would do anything to preclude
> > > > participants from participating in an open standards group
> > > > discussion is
> > > > insulting enough. To remove any doubt, maybe somebody else
> > > > should organize
> > > > those calls. I've done that (using my company's money) 
> to help the TC
> > > > community, certainly not to bar members from being included.
> > > > I will call the
> > > > conference organization which handled that call and let you
> > > > all know what
> > > > really happened.
> > > > Marc Chanliau
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Eve L. Maler [mailto:eve.maler@east.sun.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:52 PM
> > > > To: mchanliau@netegrity.com
> > > > Cc: elm@east.sun.com
> > > > Subject: Embarrassing episode with conference call
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi Marc-- I'm not sure if you joined the call on Tuesday in
> > > > time to hear
> > > > the problem we had with the conference company.  They were
> > > > holding back
> > > > from letting Securant and Entrust join the call because they had
> > > > instructions not to let them on!  I suggest you get them to
> > > > remove that
> > > > from their records, and also send an apology to at least
> > > > Darren (who we
> > > > know was held back for about 15 minutes) and possibly the
> > > > others -- maybe
> > > > even the whole list.  Or if this was some aberration and the
> > > > conference
> > > > company never should have had this instruction, an
> > > > explanation of this
> > > > would be great.  I don't want there to be any lingering 
> doubt that
> > > > Netegrity is fully supporting this open standards effort,
> > > > which would look
> > > > bad for you and hurt the group's work...
> > > >
> > > >       Eve
> > > > --
> > > > Eve Maler                                          +1 
> 781 442 3190
> > > > Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center    eve.maler @ 
> east.sun.com
> > > >
> >
> > --
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > Stephen Farrell
> > Baltimore Technologies,   tel: (direct line) +353 1 881 6716
> > 39 Parkgate Street,                     fax: +353 1 881 7000
> > Dublin 8.                mailto:stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie
> > Ireland                             http://www.baltimore.com
>