RE: [security-services] RE: Minutes for Telecon, Tuesday 30 Septe mber 2003

["Mishra, Prateek" <pmishra@netegrity.com>]

I quote from your original message:

[quote]
I will have to object to this Action Item as the SS-TC needs to re-charter
from scratch since they have completed their original deliverables. The TC
process states this at:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#closing.
[end-quote]


On investigating the URL link you provided:

[quote]

(o). Closing a TC

TC Administration may close any TC that fails to conduct at least one
quorate meeting or conduct any electronic ballots during any six month
period; whose voting membership falls below three members; has reached its
completion date; or has failed to show progress towards achieving its
purpose as defined by its charter. TC Administration must close a TC that
has completed its deliverables. A TC can be closed by resolution of its
members or by resolution of the Board.

[end-quote]

My reading of your message was: the TC has completed its deliverables and
therefore, following OASIS rules, "The TC administration must close a TC
that has completed its deliverables". I was fairly astonished (astounded?)
at this reading and asked for clarification, perhaps not in the most
collegial fashion.

Since then you have clarified your position as one of checking to make sure
we are following OASIS rules. That seems quite reasonable to me and we would
be happy to work with you to ensure that all OASIS rules are appropriately
followed.



- prateek







-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Nadalin [mailto:drsecure@us.ibm.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 8:28 PM
To: oasis sstc (E-mail)
Subject: RE: [security-services] RE: Minutes for Telecon, Tuesday 30 Septe
mber 2003





Prateek,
You have twisted/ misunderstood the issue, I did NOT indicate that the work
in the SS-TC was NOT valuable/required and did NOT indicate that IBM did
NOT support the work in the SS-TC  but there are rules to follow in OASIS
and I'm pointing out these rules. Is there a problem in doing so or are we
NOT supposed to do this ?

Are there reasons why you would not want to create a new charter (per
rules) for the new work that goes beyond the scope of the original charter
? Maybe you can clarify as I think its valuable to make sure that everyone
has a equal chance to participate in the formation of specifications in an
open standards body.

I also want to understand you statement "your statement has been made on a
public forum and therefore available to press and analysts, I wanted to
confirm with you before calling further attention to it in the broader
media" as I think that this is not the proper behavior for an OASIS
co-chair !


Anthony Nadalin | work 512.436.9568 | cell 512.289.4122


|---------+---------------------------->
|         |           "Mishra, Prateek"|
|         |           <pmishra@netegrit|
|         |           y.com>           |
|         |                            |
|         |           10/01/2003 11:00 |
|         |           AM               |
|---------+---------------------------->
 
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |
|
  |       To:       Anthony Nadalin/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, "oasis sstc (E-mail)"
<security-services@lists.oasis-open.org>                             |
  |       cc:
|
  |       Subject:  RE: [security-services] RE: Minutes for Telecon, Tuesday
30 Septe       mber 2003                                            |
 
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------|





Hmmm, I don't really get this:

[quote]

> Rob to draft charter changes
I will have to object to this Action Item as the SS-TC needs to re-charter
from scratch since they have completed their original deliverables. The TC
process states this at:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#closing.

[end-quote]

So is it IBM's official position that the SSTC should be dissolved and the
SAML effort halted?

As your statement has been made on a public forum and therefore available
to
press and analysts, I wanted to confirm with you before calling further
attention to it in the broader media.


Thanks,

Prateek Mishra
Co-Chair, SSTC
Netegrity



To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the
OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/security-services/members/leave
_workgroup.php.