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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xacml message

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

Subject: TC Meeting 28 April 2011

I. Roll Call
 Voting Members
  Hal Lockhart (Chair)
  Bill Parducci (Co-Chair, minutes)
  Paul Tyson
  Doron Grinstein
  Remon Sinnema
  Gregory Neven
  Franz-Stefan Preiss
  Jan Herrmann
  John Tolbert

  David Chadwick
  David Choy
  John Mike Davis

Quorum met: (57% per Kavi)

I. Roll Call & Approve Minutes:
   21 April 2011 TC Meeting:
   APPROVED unanimously

II. Administrivia

  F2F Information
  Will be held in Lexington, MA at the Boeing facility
  28th, 29th,30th June
  John Tolbert to publish logistics information

  Erik, Doron and Hal will be presenting. Contents being worked on now.

III. Issues
  David, is in the process of splitting document into a SAML Profile
  and XACML profile. He is a bit unclear as to what is needed in XACML
  profile based upon Paul's comments on the list. Hal offered that a
  Profile may created or an artifact on non-normative document track.
  Greg noted that he is awaiting feedback from the SAML group on the
  proposal made to that group.

  David summarized the current discussion into 4 basic topics:
  1. Use existing components in a standard way (general approval)
  2. Should be a BTG state attribute (general approval)

  3. BTG response from PDP? User knows if has BTG privilege. (open)
  4. Should there be an Obligation or special BTG response management?

  Mike suggested that state need to broadened to be more generic than
  BTG. Hal offered that a generalize dynamic state manager that could
  be used for notification, etc.

  The current mechanisms outlined are Obligation/Advice and Missing 

  Mike suggested that the case of the request spanning organizations
  is fundamentally different than than an internal solution. He 
  suggested that BTG capabilities be indicated upon initial interface
  with the PEP. Bill suggested that BTG doesn't have context until a
  Deny has been issued.

  Hal contrasted the flow diagrams posted to the list by Paul and 
  David--PDP and PEP manages the BTG state. Paul intended that the PDP 
  return a Deny with Advice.

  Doron offered that an Advice on a Deny would allow for a simple 
  Profile that would be reasonably interoperable. David noted that an
  Obligation was used in the proposal for XACML v2 compliance.

meeting adjourned.

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