RE: [xacml] Next Face-to-Face...

[Ken Yagen <kyagen@crosslogix.com>]

Title: RE: [xacml] Next Face-to-Face...

I posted once before but didn't hear back. Is anyone attending SAML F2F next week that thinks it would be possible to get together for a few hours to discuss XACML? Simon and I will be available.

 

Ken Yagen
Director, Software Development
CrossLogix, Inc
www.crosslogix.com
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Carlisle Adams [mailto:carlisle.adams@entrust.com]
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:22 PM
To: 'xacml@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject: RE: [xacml] Next Face-to-Face...

Hi,

Well, we tried...

We came up with a total of 4 people willing and able to attend the proposed F2F date/location (Simon, Bill, Ernesto, and myself).  This is too few, regardless of how many other people are available to dial in.  Consequently, we will need to plan for a face-to-face early next year and rely on productive teleconferences until then.

Carlisle and Hal.

----------
From:   Carlisle Adams[SMTP:carlisle.adams@entrust.com]
Sent:   Tuesday, November 06, 2001 3:33 PM
To:     'xacml@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject:        [xacml] Next Face-to-Face...

Hi,

Well, we've tried for a little while with this topic -- both over e-mail and verbally on the last telecon -- and it looks like we're pretty far from consensus.  Reduced travel budgets and other conference/meeting commitments have made it nearly impossible to find a date and place that are acceptable to the majority of the group.

On the other hand, many members have expressed the strong opinion that another F2F this year is important to the progression of our work.  (Sometimes you just need a whiteboard!)

So, Hal and I have decided that we will try one last time with the proposal that has garnered the most votes so far (with the slight modification I requested earlier):  a 2-day meeting in Las Vegas, from 1:00 p.m. Monday, Nov. 26 - noon Wednesday, Nov. 28.  Most people should be able to fly in on Monday and fly out on Wednesday, if desired.

The plan would be to have dial-in facilities for those who are not able to travel, but we still need sufficient attendees to make this worthwhile (otherwise, we might as well all dial in and just have a teleconference).  My feeling is that 5 or 6 physical attendees should be the minimum.

Now, a show of (electronic) hands:  how many are able to make this date and time?  Or should we just forget about a F2F until early next year?  I think we need a decision this week.  Please respond to the list by end-of-day Thursday; Hal and I will post the results on Friday, Nov. 9th.

Carlisle, Hal.