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 9 June 2016 TC meeting

Time: 4:30 PM EST (-0400 GMT)
Tel: 1-712-775-7031
Access Code: 620-103-760

Minutes for 9 June 2016 TC Meeting

I. Roll Call & Minutes
  Voting Members
   Hal Lockhart (Co-Chair)
   Bill Parducci (Co-Chair)
   Rich Levinson
   Steven Legg
   Martin Smith

  Richard Hill
  Remon Sinnenma

  Quorum: YES. 5 of 6 (83%) per Oasis site

  Approve Minutes 26 May 2016 (updated)
II. Administrivia
  Additions to Agenda
   Martin: IDESG Standards Registry inclusion
   Hal: Consensus around applicable policy list

  Recap of Document Status
   {briefly reviewed status}
   I learned that moving these to standards qualifies them for ITU-T adoption.
   Yes, Oasis has a relationship with ITU

  Errata editor
 Errata Starter docs
    Richard has volunteered to be the Editor. Some of the errata in the wiki should be 
    usable with limited clean-up.
    I will review the documents from Oasis Admin.
    This process is similar to creating an Oasis Standard.

 Nomination of XACML 3.0 and Profiles for IDESG Standards Registry
   The UN document associated with my post today outlines some possible use cases. The 
   Blockhain reference is unlikely to have a use case that intersects with XACML.
   I am requesting comment/input from the TC on the draft IDESG Nomination Form (posted as
   attachment on 6/9/2016 in TC list) for the XACML Core Spec to be accepted into the 
   IDESG Standards Registry. I particularly need for input where I put [??] in the draft. 
   I recommended that we submit two nominations forms:  one for the Core Spec and another 
   grouping together all XACML Profiles the TC would like to recommend for inclusion in 
   the Registry. I believe that the IDESG Standards Committee would prefer not to have to 
   process separate forms for each Profile since they are reviewing the nominations on 
   only a few criteria rather than the details of each proposed standard or profile. 
   I think it would be best to submit this per spec. I am not sure if each must be a 
   It is my understanding that a Profile at the level of Committee Spec or above is 
   eligible for inclusion in the IDESG Standards Register.
   Is this a workload issue on their end?
   Given details that are unique to each Specification that may make that a wash.
   I'd like to suggest that we begin a discussion on the List to determine which specs we 
   would like to nominate.
  {general consensus}

 Applicable Policy List Contents
   I think this will be the most challenging issue to solve with the Errata. I originally 
   posted something, that Steven expanded upon. I would like to take another run at this 
   after giving it some more thought. 

 Borderless Cyber Europe
   If anyone is interested, this will be happening in the beginning of September. "Early 
   Bird" pricing ends June 15. One of the key topics surrounds a threat intelligence 
   exchange. There will be a similar event called Asia later in the year.

meeting adjourned.

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