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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wss message

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

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



John Shewchuk has given me a head's up that he will be coming out with some corrections to his statements later this week, so I will wait for these and send minutes with everyone's corrections.  Tim and Tony do you have any additional comments or corrections? 



-----Original Message-----
From: Kelvin Lawrence [mailto:klawrenc@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 2:20 PM
To: Flinn, Don
Cc: ronald monzillo; wss@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [wss] Corrected Minutes of the 1/14/03 telecom

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.


"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>

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

Powered by eList eXpress LLC