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] | [List Home]

Subject: Minutes for SSTC Conference Call, April 12, 2005, v1

Minutes  for SSTC Conference Call, April 12 , v1
Minute Taker - Frederick Hirsch
26 of 38 voting members present, quorum established, 2/3 present. 

1.       Approval of minutes from 29-Mar SSTC con-call

     (a) http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200503/msg00109.html 

Approved without objection 

2.  On-going CD vote for Metadata Extensions Draft (PLEASE VOTE!)

    Vote closes Wednesday, April 13, 9AM Eastern.


Please vote today. No other comment.

3. Is CD status appropriate for informational documents?

OASIS Response:

OASIS response indicates it is appropriate if TC so decides.

Prateek - plan to bring response paper back for vote at next full meeting. 

4. Other informational notices

A. Request for SAML 2.0 speaker

Jahan - it is likely that Jahan will give presentation in May. They may be looking for a tutorial in September.

     B. SAML 2.0 slide-set uploaded (dates from Decemeber 2005, add to document repository)

 Prateek has posted some slides to repository.

5  CD vote on Executive Overview Draft


Vote to move to CD status on this 

Frederick - moved

Eve - seconded

Tony - has been cd draft in the past, not sure this is something for an "executive", what is the target audience?

Paul - was meant to be summary for executive. What is your specific concern?

Tony - a technical executive could understand it, but I know some that would not understand it

Gordon - excellent high-level overview, but it is technical

Eve - appropriate for technical managers managing implementers

Paul - not meant to be marketing

Gordon - for technical managers 

Eve  - executive overview means summary

Jeff agrees.

Scott - thought it was a CIO document, technical document

Eve - CIO's should understand it.

No other comments.

Vote passed without objection. Executive overview draft moved to CD status, since 2/3 voting members present.

6.   Reminder: Andy Moir is looking for feedback on V1.1 spec conformance certification program.  Review period has now closed (April 11).


A. http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200504/msg00079.html

B. http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200504/msg00083.html 

Andy  has received additional private comments, will put together response to all comments while protecting privacy of private respondents. Will send email to SSTC list today or tomorrow.

Tony - how is final decision be made?

Andy - will send response for feedback, then to Patrick Gannon and OASIS board.

Tony - this directly effects the TC, so is the TC out of any vote process here?

Andy - This is a referral arrangement, not a direct OASIS program, hence not controlled and operated by OASIS and TC. Program already exists outside of TC today.

Tony - would like to see this addressed in comments. Not sure of value if not something everyone can use.

Andy - Understood

Greg Whitehead - Reiterates concern of any vendor running a program for other vendors in the industry - a competitive concern

Eve - has similar concern

Andy asks for specifics

Eve - If one vendor is elevated among others as gatekeeper, means company might have to bring early versions of product to a competitor, not something a vendor might want to do

Greg - can make long list of specific concerns, but there is a major concern related to a conflict of interest - a company selling a product and also gating how other companies can bring products forward - even if everything done well

Heather Hinton - PingId could get stamp of approval, simply by being chosen

Prateek has additional comments

Darrin - When the group is formed to govern this service, these concerns were raised and addressed, so how concerns are dealt with should be in Andy's response.

No other discussion

7. SAML 2.0 Technical Overview (new draft uploaded April 11)



Eve - needs a lot of work, suggests Prateek add his material and planned changes.

Prateek plans to generate next version.

Prateek - Please review, will save time answering questions later.

8. Attribute sharing profile for X.509-based Authn (new draft uploaded April 5)


A. http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200504/msg00042.html 

Rick is not on the call, but a new version has been published as well as comments noted. 

Tom - submitted editorial comments to Rick who plans to update the document.

9. Errata Document (new draft uploaded April 11)


This draft (04)
has proposed text for all PEs except PE 10. New errata was discussed on focus call of April 5.


Note: PE5 is still open and subject of extensive thread discussed below. 

Jahan - two minor corrections have been made this morning but not posted . Haven't added material from focus call last week, will add to next version.

Scott's proposals for PE resolutions were sent before last week's focus call.

PE1 - relay state for HTTP redirects - Scott posted proposal 2 weeks ago, reviewed in focus call.

Scott's proposal accepted without objection.

PE2 - language clarification

Scott's proposal accepted without objection.

PE3 - missing piece, doesn't break anything

Scott - need to add to extension proposal for this, so suggest this be moved to issue list for future extensions or revisions

No object to moving to issues list.

Prateek - is there an issues section?

Jahan - no, who keeps the issues list?

Rob asks whether Eve was the last owner of the issues list.

Eve - all 2.0 issues were closed, one issues was deferred.

Agreement to start new post-2.0 issues list, including this PE and the deferred item from the current issues list.

Jahan offers to own new post-2.0 issues list.

PE4 Language proposal from Scott

Scott's proposal accepted without objection.

PE5 - text proposed, then a correction to change persistent to transient, be aware of this.

Scott - suggest we have more discusson on general AllowCreate question to be resolved, Scott's proposal was early. Need specific proposals from others related to this concern.

Discussion will be required on list.

Open issue.

PE6 Language proposal from Scott

Greg - ok if there is a use for it.

Scott's proposal accepted without objection.

PE7 combine with PE9 

Prateek - This was discussed briefly on focus call

Scott - interop participants should review

Open issue, pending review by all.

AI - Rob to review PE7

PE 8 Proposal from Thomas

Prateek - scope?

Scott - limited to termination

No implicit logout in MNI.

Prateek, just terminate or include update

Thomas - Just terminate

Proposal accepted without objection.

PE9 - merged with PE7

PE10, Open, Jahan to propose text.

Jahan - Where to put PEs when closed, since it will disturb E section.  Propose not changing any numbers, PEs stay the same, once everything closed, then re-number and re-order. Plan to post new version by tomorrow.

10.  Open AIs

#0221: Request copy of Thomas Grosz paper for inclusion in SSTC archives
Owner: Maryann Hondo
Status: Open
Assigned: 2005-04-12
Due: --- 
Prateek asks on status. Maryann wrote letter to IEEE, waiting for reply - issue is IEEE copyright. Paper is available on net, but goal is to have copy.

#0220: Respond to Rick R on subject confirmation issue on the X509 Attribute Sharing Profile
Owner: Scott Cantor
Status: Open
Assigned: 2005-03-30
Due: --- 

#0219: Propose specific errata text for E4
Owner: Scott Cantor
Status: Open
Assigned: 2005-03-30
Due: --- 

#0218: Propose specific errata text for E3
Owner: Thomas Wisniewski
Status: Open
Assigned: 2005-03-30
Due: ---

#0217: Explore with OASIS how best to do publication of redlined specs based on errata.
Owner: Eve Maler
Status: Open
Assigned: 2005-03-30
Due: --- 
Eve sent mail message to Mary McCrae on 30 March, will re-send.

#0216: Formulate some suggested redline text for E7 for review.
Owner: Jahan Moreh
Status: Open
Assigned: 2005-03-30
Due: --- 

#0213: Prepare final CD draft of metadata-1x document and submit it to OASIS
Owner: Eve Maler
Status: Open
Assigned: 2005-03-29
Due: --- 
Eve offers to also take care of executive overview.

#0210: Links to new IPR policy to be sent to SSTC
Owner: Rob Philpott
Status: Open
Assigned: 2005-03-15
Due: --- 

#0208: Run additional tests to check issues with deflate encoding and rfc1951 (java libraries)
Owner: Scott Cantor
Status: Open
Assigned: 2005-03-01
Due: --- 

#0180: Need to update SAML server trust document
Owner: Jeff Hodges
Status: Open
Assigned: 2004-07-12
Due: --- 
new AI - Prateek - Revise tech overview, v produce ersion 05 draft
Eve/Scott  proposes links to external material explaining SAML, including Wiki.

11. Discussion threads

A. XPath attribute profile 

Prateek - What should TC be made aware of? Status? 

Cameron - plans to update document, simpler version, enumerate supported XPaths. Would like to pursue CD status eventually?

Prateek - please upload PDF version as well

    i. request for pdf version of file

   ii. Use-Cases posted to list

   iii. XPath Attribute Profile: XPath as an Identifier

   iv. XPath Attribute Profile: XPath URI as a URN

B. PE5 - NameIDPolicy  (Should this be re-named?) 

i. Proposal From Scott Cantor

      ii. Discussion



Prateek - need to rename.

Brian - this portion of the specification may be more general than intended, but other portions of the spec are also very general. A profile may be needed here, rather than modifying core.

General discussion regarding correct approach, specification/conformance changes, whether missing a profile or whether this is part of SSO profile.

Prateek - suggests smaller group work on this issue.

Scott - need to allow pre-provisioned name identifiers.

Greg - perhaps "unless name identifiers managed out of band, then ..."

Scott - proposed text along these lines. SP can't assume what IDP will do, given flag.

Greg - out of band, means both sides agree.

Prateek - federation agreement is at another level

Rob - this can be interop issue

Scott - need to hear example of this

Brian - IDP has stricter reading of AllowCreate, will not issue identifiers unless True, other implementations will not use flag, then default is false, deadlock since IDP waiting to create identifier but not allowed to

Scott concurs, hence wanted default to be True, but Liberty requirements were different.

Brian - false value raises issues.

Scott, can you propose improved wording? Not clear whether this is IDP discretionary

Treat as advisory data from SP, decision at IDP, an audit viewpoint

Brian - Relationship to Consent attribute is not clear

Scott - added wording regarding this

Brian - needs to understand consensus of group

Prateek agrees with audit viewpoint, will review Scott's wording.

Scott suggests additional improvements to proposed wording would help. Looking for agreement that flag is intended as input to IDP processing, rather than indicating normative behavour

Rob - local policy discretion is applied to everything we do

Brian - what is value without processing rules

Greg what if, "IDP implementations that strongly protect user privacy may refuse to return an identifier if AllowCreate is not set to true", this allows SP to decide whether reason to set AllowCreate to false (protect SP in privacy circumstances) otherwise always set to true.... This would be appropriate for cases where privacy matters (e.g. Liberty) and ability for SP to express policy to IDP (enabling audit of SP behavour)

Rob in case false is set, IDP can only use pre-decided name identifiers

Greg - Liberty  use case, circle of trust using cookie introductoin mechanism, (1) SP knows location of IDP even though haven't visited, no state or cookies, then application wants to personalize page, see if authenticated at IDP, set AllowCreate to false, don't want to establish federated relationship, would rather have explicit federation request if not in place already. Don't want federations to occur silently, enabling unclear tracking

Discussion converging toward audit approach.

Greg - Different policies at IDP might result into different behaviours based on AllowCreate, this can give SP guidance on use of flag.

Brian - some SPs will always use false

Greg - offers to get Liberty feedback next week at Liberty F2F

Scott will take another pass at wording, reflecting this discussion

Greg - could propose extension to metadata to define how this is used

Continued discussion on whether there is agreement on taking audit/hint approach, or another profile approach. Questions about how these profiles would compose.

AI Scott to provide revised proposal text.

Meeting Ajourned.




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