Request for clarification on the effects of missing sponsorships

Dear all,

 

I am writing this email to ask for some clarifications about the effects of a missing sponsorship for some STIX 2.1 objects. 

From our last call, I understood that “Infrastructure” and “Course of Action” are at risk of being removed from the standard. In this regard, I was wondering about the fact that, while “infrastructure” is a new object, “Course of Action” was already introduced in STIX 2.0. If I do not see any technical issue in removing “Infrastructure” (besides the effort of going through the whole standard and ensuring integrity), would not the removal of “Course of Action” impact backward compatibility? As an alternative, could the missing sponsorship mean going back to the STIX 2.0 representation of “Course of Action”?

 

Best regards

 

               Marco

Siemens AG
Corporate Technology
Research in Digitalization and Automation
Corporate CERT Services
CT RDA ITS CER-DE
Otto-Hahn-Ring 6
81739 Muenchen, Germany 
mailto:
www.siemens.com/ingenuityforlife

Siemens Aktiengesellschaft: Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Jim Hagemann Snabe; Managing Board: Joe Kaeser, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer; Roland Busch, Lisa Davis, Klaus Helmrich, Janina Kugel, Cedrik Neike, Michael Sen, Ralf P. Thomas; Registered offices: Berlin and Munich, Germany; Commercial registries: Berlin Charlottenburg, HRB 12300, Munich, HRB 6684; WEEE-Reg.-No. DE 23691322

 

Attachment:
smime.p7s

Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature