Re: [cti] Re: [EXT] [cti] Motion for an OASIS Open Repository for STIX Enhancement Proposals (SEPs)

I fully support this updated / augmented motion from Trey that includes my additional points.

Bret

From:  <> on behalf of Jane Ginn @ OASIS <>

Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2018 4:30:00 PM

To: 

Subject: Re: [cti] Re: [EXT] [cti] Motion for an OASIS Open Repository for STIX Enhancement Proposals (SEPs)

 

All:

I second the Augmented version of the Motion by Trey & Bret.

Jane

On 7/31/2018 3:15 PM, Trey Darley wrote:

> Thank you to Bret for providing additional precision to my motion to

> open the OASIS Open Repository for STIX Enhancement Proposals

> (SEPs). It is a fact of life that the TC working calls typically occur

> quite late in my day (as opposed to folks on the US Western Seaboard)

> so it does happen that from time to time I respond imperfectly to

> consensus reached on TC working calls, modulo the timeshift.

>

> Naturally, given that we did discuss this on the weekly TC working

> call at some length, I am grateful for the clarification which Bret

> has provided and do hereby amend my original motion to include the

> additional details which Bret outlines below.

>

> My motion, thus augmented, still stands. If there have been no

> objections by Tuesday, 07 August at 21h UTC Bret, Ivan, or I will

> submit the form [1] to request OASIS staff to create the repository.

>

> [1]: 
https://clicktime.symantec.com/a/1/tGQs29UCugcEleYRJG3Sl4iEIbLWzNleRMdWGwDW2cg=?d=dbF-oa6Sgr5cbpQi1UJsp8ZH2olyYt1kKn-l6VHS3noHzcRWZxemU6Ik80aLNk9-N2L3j4WgMCqdw76LrvcEF5zMsfqTSxPyQkEII5j84PmE1Eh-wZPDt2t1lsO0V7sxG7MFTdPRSv8g2t9bSxqzSE_FiU2SDxvDSU_y0sx9DCykbMP5NThWlernbcAbuZrCkEc4Y9asKXVBuOj61xX8R4eXGOfpIosoq-ttmzfVi7z_HfsXG1LTQIIqQ3V25CT97OByHURV-m_AsvotNnPwnyvVkNhydeQ7am1ZgRnkqdAONu60Ttp6vCJ7wcOrm0O7wUqtXCoruLpuINwPlAY9n4GU-_eJiafG0gaeqIkv_mfgF4t30eOnUB4TxS95JkFDIw9f3NStCcXzjI0GddURgLb9Egi5oU2FGmO0T3fAoci_pAIh96umJQEuP7qbORCs8FpPRyBd7lhqS-LIC7msxQqNyJth9AZj8CCqwJ97dOWDFDl8m_4u9FxtYkfD24NBEQ%3D%3D&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.oasis-open.org%2Fresources%2Ftc-admin-requests%2Fopen-repository-request

>

> Cheers,

> Trey

>

> On 31.07.2018 21:52:27, Bret Jordan wrote:

>> I will second this only with the following caveats, otherwise the

>> motion does not address the concerns I had originally.

>>

>>

>> 1) I think the repos need to have a CTI prefix in their name, so I

>>    would propose we use the name: "cti-sep-repository"

>>

>>

>> 2) This repository will only be used for the following types of

>>    SEPs.

>>

>>

>>  * New STIX Domain Objects (SDOs)

>>  * New STIX Relationship Objects (SROs)

>>  * New STIX Cyber Observables (SCOs)

>>  * New STIX Object Extensions

>>     * These are named groups of properties.

>>

>> 3) The following types of SEPs are out of scope for this repository

>>    and work:

>>

>>

>>  * Redefining an existing property on an object to add clarity or

>>    enhanced meaning.

>>

>>  * For example, explaining double or triple tagging of data in a

>>    "tags" property.

>>

>>  * Redefining the semantics of existing SDOs, SROs, and/or SCOs (or

>>    properties thereof) which are already defined in CSDs and/or CSs.

>>

>>  * Adding to or redefining the semantics of STIX Patterning

>>    (including, but not limited to adding new elements, expressions,

>>    operators, or language elements).

>>

>> 4) This repository and registry will be used for SEPs that are

>>    officially submitted to the TC by TC members or for SEPs created

>>    by the TC itself.

>>

>> 5) We will in the coming weeks investigate a different option for

>>    registering enhancements / extensions from:

>>

>>  * TC members that do not wish to submit their IPR to the TC

>>  * TC members that do wish to submit their SEP to the TC as long as

>>    it is unmodified.

>>  * Third-Parties that do not wish to submit their IPR to the TC

>>  * Third-Parties that do wish to submit their IPR to the TC

>>

>>

>> On the working call today I was okay with coming to middle ground to

>> address Allan's concerns, however, the motion did not capture what I

>> believe we agreed to on the call. If my caveats are accepted as part

>> of the motion, then I am okay with this moving forward.

>>

-- 

R. Jane Ginn, MSIA, MRP

Secretary, Cyber Threat Intelligence Technical Committee (CTI TC)

OASIS



+1(928)399-0509

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that 

generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:

https://clicktime.symantec.com/a/1/QY6diZUWZGbtE7rPk8d12QfLlQGmw302YPksAhiKorA=?d=dbF-oa6Sgr5cbpQi1UJsp8ZH2olyYt1kKn-l6VHS3noHzcRWZxemU6Ik80aLNk9-N2L3j4WgMCqdw76LrvcEF5zMsfqTSxPyQkEII5j84PmE1Eh-wZPDt2t1lsO0V7sxG7MFTdPRSv8g2t9bSxqzSE_FiU2SDxvDSU_y0sx9DCykbMP5NThWlernbcAbuZrCkEc4Y9asKXVBuOj61xX8R4eXGOfpIosoq-ttmzfVi7z_HfsXG1LTQIIqQ3V25CT97OByHURV-m_AsvotNnPwnyvVkNhydeQ7am1ZgRnkqdAONu60Ttp6vCJ7wcOrm0O7wUqtXCoruLpuINwPlAY9n4GU-_eJiafG0gaeqIkv_mfgF4t30eOnUB4TxS95JkFDIw9f3NStCcXzjI0GddURgLb9Egi5oU2FGmO0T3fAoci_pAIh96umJQEuP7qbORCs8FpPRyBd7lhqS-LIC7msxQqNyJth9AZj8CCqwJ97dOWDFDl8m_4u9FxtYkfD24NBEQ%3D%3D&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.oasis-open.org%2Fapps%2Forg%2Fworkgroup%2Fportal%2Fmy_workgroups.php