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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

security-services message

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

Subject: RE: Proposed F2F #3 Agenda

Title: RE: Proposed F2F #3 Agenda

hi -

it's probably a good idea to have at least a brief report by conformance subgroup on Monday, so that any issues related to conformance could be included in the 5pm review/categorization of open issues? Perhaps we can just go with the 4:30-5 slot, with the following list of topics:

- Conformance Clause v0.005, especially the recommendation on "Conformance Partitions" and mandatory/optional elements within each partition.

- Recommendation regarding distinction of validation and certification of conformance.
- Conformance Program V0.004, especially preliminary recommendation regarding test groups/cases.
- Test tools and mechanisms applicable to conformance testing.

Each of these would be presented with the idea of identitying issues, rather than resolving them...

The additional hour on Tuesday was the result of interest in exploring the last of these four topics in more detail. However, since only a subset of the TC is likely to be interested, perhaps we could do that over lunch on Tuesday with anyone who wants to join in?



-----Original Message-----
From: Eve L. Maler [mailto:eve.maler@east.sun.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 10:53 AM
To: oasis sstc
Subject: Re: Proposed F2F #3 Agenda

A few comments:

At 06:00 PM 6/19/01 -0700, Jeff Hodges wrote:
>Here's my shot at a nominal detailed agenda. Please comment (e.g. need
>more time
>for something, think something else will take less, etc.). There's still some
>nuances to address like whether the conformance folk can/should do a breakout
>session and if we have a separate room to accomodate such. Given our
>this morning in the focus group, and the complexities/subtleties of the
>assertion + req/resp stuff I fear discussions of such will use every bit
>of the
>time alloc'd for 'em. [I did this in a bit of a rush, there may be some
>brain fade bugs in it; apologies in advance if so]
>I'd like to get the agenda nailed down by Wed late evening (or earlier) if
>possible so I can update the web page Thur morning.
>Monday, 25 June 2001
>8:30 -  9:00  Meet and greet; continental breakfast
>9:00 -  9:30  Administrative
>                  Call to order
>                  Roll call
>                  Approve minutes of previous meeting
>                  Review and approve agenda

(Note that we won't be able to approve minutes if we don't have quorum...)

>9:30  - 10:15  Subgroup
>            [5]   Issues List (Hal Lockhart)
>            [10]  Bindings (Prateek Mishra; just information transfer,
>                    a detailed session to discuss issues will occur
>                    later in the meeting)
>            [10]  Security & Privacy Considerations (JeffH for now)
>            [10]  Sessions (Gil Piltz)
>            [10]  PassThru Authentication (? Irving Reid proxy for
>                    Stephen Farrell)

I think these could use 15-20 minutes each, and this could allow for a few
minutes to *collect* (not discuss) issues that haven't already been
captured in the issues list.

>10:15 - 10:30  Break
>10:30 - 11:30  Subgroup reports/presentations, cont'd
>            [30]  Focus group (Eve?)
>                   philosophical differences between assert-00 and core-08

This could maybe be two 10-to-15-minute presentations, one for Phill and
one for me/Dave.  Could show both sides of the coin, and would still leave
a bit of time to *collect* (not discuss) questions.

>11:30 - 12:00  ? [perhaps aforelisted subgroup reports are too short
>12:00 - 1:15   Lunch
>1:15  - 3:00   Assertion + Request/responses discussion
>                  "authz dec assertion" + related requests/responses
>3:00  - 3:15   Break
>3:15  - 4:30   Assertion + Request/responses discussion, cont'd
>                  "attribute assertion" + related requests/responses
>4:30  - 5:00   Conformance Group reports/presentations, 1st portion (?)

Do we really need two portions?  I would try to get them all in the same slot.

>5:00  - 5:30   Categorizing and ranking of open issues

I'd rather use this time for pushing through more
assertion/request/response discussions.  I think we should allow ourselves
to get through only one of them by the end of the first day, and if we do
it faster, great.

>5:30  - 7:00   Break + travel time to dinner location (likely in Palo Alto)
>7:00  - 9:00   Group Dinner

I will post more information on this today.

>  Tuesday, 26 June 2001
>  ---------------------
>8:30  - 9:00   Continental breakfast
>9:00  - 9:30   Administrative
>                  Review of, and tweaks to, the Agenda for this second day
>                  Summary of findings/observations from previous day
>9:30  - 10:30  Conformance Group reports/presentations (Bob Griffin)
>10:30 - 10:45  Break
>10:30 - 12:15   Assertion + Request/responses discussion, cont'd
>                   "authn assert"  + related requests/responses
>12:15 - 1:30   Lunch
>1:30  - 3:00   Overall Request/Response analysis/review, and folding findings
>                  back into assertion + req/resp design.
>3:00  - 4:00   Summary, review action items, discuss F2F #4.

I'd like to have a discussion about schedule specifics.  If we've gotten
into a good groove at this meeting, we may be able to map out, with a bit
more accuracy, when each part of the draft will be stable.

Eve Maler                                             +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Development  eve.maler @ east.sun.com

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

Powered by eList eXpress LLC