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: Minutes for 28 July 2011 TC Meeting

I. Roll Call
 Voting Members
  Hal Lockhart (Chair)
  Bill Parducci (Co-Chair, minutes)
  David Brossard
  Erik Rissanen
  Paul Tyson
  Gregory Neven
  Rich Levinson
  John Tolbert

  Crystal Hayes
  Richard Hill

 Quorum met: (66% per Kavi)

I. Roll Call & Approve Minutes:
  Minutes from 21 July 2011 TC meeting voted on.

II. Administrivia

 New Members
  John introduced Crystal Hayes and and Richard Hill from Boeing as new
  participants in the TC.

 V3 Procedural Status
  Bill has submitted the SAML and RBAC Profiles and v3 Core XACML
  documents to Oasis as Committee Draft and requested a 15 day Public
  Review, per the vote last week by the TC.

 Meeting Schedule, Guest Speaker
  The TC meeting schedule will move back to alternate weeks, with the
  next meeting on 11 August, followed by 25 August. Hal asked the TC if
  it would be interested in the presentation by Andrea Westerinen of CA
  Technologies on the 25th. There is general consensus that this date
  will work. The presentation will take a bit over one hour and will
  comprise the complete agenda for this TC meeting.

 v2 vs V3 "Diff" documentation
  There have been requests for an XACML v2/v3 "diff" documentation be
  posted to the TC site. David Brossard offered to act as editor and
  suggested that the TC wiki is the best location to work on the
  document. Hal offered to post some of his previous presentations.

  Rich requested that members be able to add pages to the wiki for
  subject matter cods.  Hal explained that all TC members have the
  ability to add to the wiki by logging into it.

  Hal suggested that outcome of the diff documentation be labelled as
  "DRAFT/UNAPPROVED" until such time the TC feels that it is ready for
  formal acceptance by the TC.

III. Issues
 Conformance test "bug"
  David Brossard explained why Not Applicable is the correct response in
  his opinion.

 Attribute predicate
  Greg Neven indicated that he will try to have an update by the next TC

  Jan posted to the list a question re: Obligations on Indeterminate.
  Erik noted that previous discussions ruled out Obligations for
  Indeterminate and Not Applicable because the Policies do not apply by
  definition. Hal requested that the TC consider this issue carefully
  because there are likely to be ramifications that percolate throughout
  the system. Design alternatives on how to solve this problem are
  encouraged to further the discussion..

  Rich raised the question about the level of detail about conformance
  and attestation. Hal reviewed the Oasis guidelines for the description
  and acceptable conformance:

  TC Process section 2.18 (8) says:
  (8) Conformance Clauses.
  (8a) For Standards Track Work Products:
   A specification that is approved by the TC at the Committee
   Specification Public Review Draft, Committee Specification or OASIS
   Standard level must include a separate section, listing a set of
   numbered conformance clauses, to which any implementation of the
   specification must adhere in order to claim conformance to the
   specification (or any optional portion thereof).

   (8b) For Non-Standards Track Work Products:
   None required.

  TC Process section 1 Definitions (aq) says:
  "Statement of Use", with respect to a Committee Specification, is a
   written statement by an OASIS Organizational Member stating that it
   is successfully using or implementing that specification in
   accordance with the conformance clauses specified in Section 2.18,
   and stating whether its use included the interoperation of multiple
   independent implementations.

  TC Process section 3.4.1 says, in part:
  After the approval of a Committee Specification, and after three
  Statements of Use explicitly referencing the Committee Specification,
  including approval date, have been presented to the TC, a TC may
  resolve by Special Majority Vote to submit the Committee Specification
  as a Candidate OASIS Standard. The TC may decide to withdraw the
  submission, by Special Majority Vote, at any time until the final
  approval. Upon Resolution of the TC to submit the specification, its
  Chair shall submit the following items to the TC Administrator:
  (f) The Statements of Use presented above; 

  To Hal's knowledge these are the only OASIS requirements relating to

  Hal also noted that XACML has had a conformance section since version
  1.0, whereas it has only been required by OASIS since June 2007.

meeting adjourned

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