RE: [wss] Corrected Minutes of the 1/14/03 telecom

[Kelvin Lawrence <klawrenc@us.ibm.com>]

Don, do you intend to post updated minutes
based on your discussions with Ron and others ? I just want to be sure
so I know which minutes we will be voting to approve on our next call.

Thanks
Kelvin


"Flinn, Don" <Don.Flinn@quadrasis.com>
wrote on 01/20/2003 02:12:05 PM:

> Hi Ron
> 
> In response to your question about whether the minutes accurately
> captured the assurances requested and the assurances offered.  I
> tried to capture the words of all the members but may have missed
> some.  If anyone has some corrections or critical words that
I may 
> have missed,  I would be happy to update the minutes with such
> missing or mis-recorded critical wording.
> 
> My own recollection of the sense of this matter was that Tim was 
> looking for reassurances that both IBM and Microsoft agreed with the
> need and urgency for a new TC to be formed quickly and that 
> Microsoft and IBM would participate in the new TC. Further, that the
> wss TC needed and required of the new TC definition of security 
> policy and negotiation, which, it was understood, would be part of
> other, broader policy objectives for the new TC. The IBM and 
> Microsoft representatives gave these assurances.  As for what
the 
> wss TC should create as input to the new TC, I believe that Tim's
> words cover that point- "This TC defines parameters and mechanism
> that need to be agreed between consumer and sender.  Just develop
a 
> List.   Leave out the negotiation and the schema.". After
that the 
> updated motion was read and unanimously accepted with no objections
> as to what was intended.
> 
> Don
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ronald monzillo [mailto:ronald.monzillo@sun.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 1:38 PM
> To: Flinn, Don
> Cc: wss@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [wss] Corrected Minutes of the 1/14/03 telecom
> 
> 
> Don,
> 
> I'd like to clarify parts of the minutes, especially what I was trying
> to convey when I spoke.
> 
> > Ron Monzillo Shouldnt we agree as a TC whether we want to
do work 
> > before discussing changing the charter. There is disagreement
on what 
> > the wording of charter means.
> 
> and how can we decide if the charter needs to be changed without first
> coming to a common understanding
> and agreement of what work it is that we want to test against the
scope 
> of the charter.
> 
> > Ron  There are different aspects to policy  Policy about
binding to 
> > different parts; the way different types of policy are used;
Domain 
> > specific policy. We need to understand how to use this. I support
the 
> > idea that the different parts should be done. 
> 
> I described 3 different aspects of the policy/qop space, suggested
that 
> the different
> aspects would likely fall into the charter of different forums, and
> stated that
> in my view, the WSS TC has responsability in the last area.
> 
> . The advertisement or binding of requirements and capabilities
> to service definitions (eg. WSDL) and invocations.
> . The domain independent requirements and capabilities model or framework
> . The domain specific representation of requirements and capabilities
in
> support of the use of the wss security mechanisms
> 
> > Ron Monzilla  ...
> 
> Monzillo -
> 
> > Ron  Where are we? We should decide on the nature of the work
before 
> > the form it should take. Experience in the space for .host and
DNS are 
> > good examples....
> 
> because they demonstrate precedent for evolution of the methods used
for 
> exchanging
> such information between systems.
> 
> > Tim  Im seeking two assurances  1. IBM & Micro feel
the time is 
> > right to form a TC 2. Both will participate  Assure not too
clear on 
> > #2. Would accept friendly amendment if both assurances are given.
> 
> Do the minutes accurately capture the assurances that were requested
and 
> those that were offered?
> I thought there was another aspect of the request relating to what
the 
> new TC would accept as
> its inputs.
> 
> Ron
> 
> Flinn, Don wrote:
> 
> >The minutes of the 1/14/03 telecom have been corrected and are
> attached.  If there are any other corrections please send them
to the list.
> >
> >Don
> >
> > <<Minutes_1_14_03.doc>> 
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>