[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Notes from April 3 meeting
Minutes for the meeting of the Electronic Identity Credential Trust Elevation Methods (Trust Elevation) Technical Committee April 3, 2014. 1. Call to Order and Welcome. 2. Roll Call Attending (please notify me if you attended the meeting but are not on the list below) Abbie Barbir, Bank of America - y Anil Saldhana, Red Hat Bob Sunday Brendan Peter, CA Carl Mattocks, Bofa Cathy Tilton, Daon - y Charline Duccans, DHS Duane DeCouteau Calvin Colin Wallis, New Zealand Government Dale Rickards, Verizon Business David Brossard, Axiomatics Dazza Greenwood Debbie Bucci, NIH Deborah Steckroth, RouteOne LLC Detlef Huehnlein, Federal Office for Information Diana Proud-Madruga - y Diego Matute, Centrify Don Thibeau, Open Identity Exchange - y Doron Cohen, SafeNet Doron Grinstein, BiTKOO Gershon Janssen - y Ilene Bridges Ivonne Thomas, Hasso Plattner Institute Jaap Kuipers, Amsterdam James Clark – Oasis Jeff Broburg, CA John Bradley John "Mike" Davis, Veteran's Affairs John Walsh, Sypris Electronics Jonas Hogberg Julian Hamersley, Adv Micro Devices Kevin Mangold, NIST - y Lucy Lynch ISOC Marcus Streets, Thales e-Security Marty Schleiff, The Boeing Company Mary Ruddy, Identity Commons - y Massimiliano Masi, Tiani "Spirit" GmbH Mike Harrop Mohammad Jafari, ESC - Peter Alterman, SAFE-BioPharma - y Peter Jones - Rainer Hoerbe - Rebecca Nielsen, Booz Allen Hamilton Rich Furr Ronald Perez, Advanced Micro Devices Scott Fitch Lockeed Martin Shaheen Abdul Jabbar, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. - y Shahrokh Shahidzadeh (Intel Corp Suzanne Gonzales-Webb, VA - y Tony Rutkowski Tony Nadlin Thomas Hardjono, M.I.T. William Barnhill, Booz Allen Hamilton Adrianne James, VA Patrick, Axiomatics Steve Olshansky 72 percent of the voting members were present at the meeting. We did have quorum. 2. Agenda review and approval We used the following chat room for the call: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/trust-el chat room text is included at the end of the minutes. The agenda was approved. 3. Approval of the Minutes Abbie asked if there were any objections to approving the minutes from March 6 and March 20. There were no objections The minutes for the two meetings were approved. 4. Resolution and feedback on third deliverable. We need to physically address every comment and to have a comment resolution. The editors reviewed the comments. Most are editorial. There is a comment resolution draft that Steve put together. After we review every comment and get the TC’s resolution then there needs to be a ballot to review the resolution. We need to give the commenters a link to the resolution. If the TC determines that a comment is technical, then we also need to redo the public review. We need to be very thorough about the way we resolve the comments. Abbie updated the spread sheet of the comments received and the proposed resolution. O the TC website, there are WD 11 and WD12. WD 11 has the redlines. WD 12 is the cleaned-up version. Abbie strongly recommends we download this spreadsheet. Peter has agreed to walk through the comments. Abbie shared the spreadsheet on the website. Peter began with the first comment: goals of deliverable do not appear to match the text. Peter replied we agreed to remove appendix B. Susan asked about the source of appendix B. Is there some reason we should take it out. Peter explained it was removed as it is not referenced in body of the document. And additional work will be handled in deliverable 4. Peter continued the next comment is a section not fully referenced. We now directly site the URL and quote the blog post. (Tab 746.) Peter continued with 745, a missing reference. The two URLs that didn’t match are two different documents. To further clarify we added an additional blog URL. Peter continued with tab 743. He didn’t understand this concern. So we have no response. Abbie so noted. No action needed. Peter addressed tab 742. It is noted, no action. When we put reference in that is non-normative, putting a reference in doesn’t require a citation. It means that it was part of the process under which the document was generated. It does not mean that there needs to be a quote. “It is non-normative”. Peter addressed tab 741. It is noted. This TC belongs where it is. There are sufficient reasons to have a conformance clause. Since there is no mandatory language in the document, we don’t believe the concern needs to be addressed. A committee specification is not a conformance clause. Abbie asked if there were any disagreements. None heard. Peter addressed tab 740. It is another comment about a normative reference without language. Tom suggested maybe we want to check with OASIS policy about if we can cite non-normative references. *** Action item to check with Chet if OASIS policy allows citation of non-normative references. Peter addressed tab 739. It is the same thing. Peter continued tab 738 is the same thing. A non-normative reference not referenced in the text. We will add a bibliography and see if that is sufficient for Chet. Peter addressed tab 733. We didn’t intend to have any language act as RCF 2019 keywords. Using May or Must or Should are key words. Noted, no action needed. Peter continued for tab 732 the same thing goes. This is not a normative document. He doesn’t want us to use the word conformance. Peter addressed tab 730. He acknowledged it and updated the link. He is unhappy with permanent redirects. As of the time of editing all the links were valid. Abbe noted that the ITU-T won’t accept links. Peter continued with tab 729. It is another conformance clause confusion. It is not a conformance clause. The word entity is a general term. He did clarify a point or two. Abbie said since the editors didn’t’ fully accept the comments as they have been approved, he would like to ask the TC for approval of the change. Abbie asked are there any objections? None heard. Abbie continued with tab 728. LOA is not defined. We will define it. Or import it from x.1254. Abbie said tab 727 looks like cut and paste. We removed the appendix. Abbie continued with tab 726, key definition should be part of the specification. Peter said that refers to key definition in the appendix that was removed. Abbie said tab 725 is the same thing. Abbie concluded these were the official comments. There were also some non–official comments. We will address those directly and provide a summary when Steve returns. This concludes the official comment resolution. We will update the spreadsheet and post it. Abbie asked for a motion to accept the updated spreadsheet changes as our resolution. Don made a motion to approve requesting Special Majority Vote on approving Electronic Identity Credential Trust Elevation Framework Version 1.0 at https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=52634&wg_abbrev=trust-el with Non-Material Changes as a Committee Specification Suzanne seconded. Abbie asked if there were any objections. None heard. The motion passed. Abbie announced that we have victory. 5. Editor update Abbie said many thanks to Mary who suggested we talk with Andrew about being editor of deliverable 4. Andrew is willing to take the plunge, but needs to select a starting date after his is done with a NSTIC proposal revision. 6. Adjourn Abbie asked for a motion to adjourn. Gershon made the motion. Dianna seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mary Ruddy1: shaheen can you join the call? Shaheen Abdul Jabbar (JPMC): give me a minute anonymous morphed into Mohammad Jafari (ESC, VHA) abbie barbir (BofA): https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/trust-el/documents.php Diana Proud-Madruga: Can someone please post the webex URL? The one I have isn't working... Don Thibeau: sorry to be late anonymous morphed into Diana Proud-Madruga1 |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]