RE: [wss] Corrected Minutes of the 1/14/03 telecom

From
Kelvin Lawrence <>
Date
2003-01-22T19:19:42+00:00
ID
Thread
RE: [wss] Corrected Minutes of the 1/14/03 telecom
Don, do you intend to post updated minutes
based on your discussions with Ron and others ? I just want to be sure
so I know which minutes we will be voting to approve on our next call.

Thanks

Kelvin

"Flinn, Don" <>
wrote on 01/20/2003 02:12:05 PM:

> Hi Ron

> 

> In response to your question about whether the minutes accurately

> captured the assurances requested and the assurances offered.  I

> tried to capture the words of all the members but may have missed

> some.  If anyone has some corrections or critical words that
I may 

> have missed,  I would be happy to update the minutes with such

> missing or mis-recorded critical wording.

> 

> My own recollection of the sense of this matter was that Tim was 

> looking for reassurances that both IBM and Microsoft agreed with the

> need and urgency for a new TC to be formed quickly and that 

> Microsoft and IBM would participate in the new TC. Further, that the

> wss TC needed and required of the new TC definition of security 

> policy and negotiation, which, it was understood, would be part of

> other, broader policy objectives for the new TC. The IBM and 

> Microsoft representatives gave these assurances.  As for what
the 

> wss TC should create as input to the new TC, I believe that Tim's

> words cover that point- "This TC defines parameters and mechanism

> that need to be agreed between consumer and sender.  Just develop
a 

> List.   Leave out the negotiation and the schema.". After
that the 

> updated motion was read and unanimously accepted with no objections

> as to what was intended.

> 

> Don

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: ronald monzillo [mailto:]

> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 1:38 PM

> To: Flinn, Don

> Cc: 

> Subject: Re: [wss] Corrected Minutes of the 1/14/03 telecom

> 

> 

> Don,

> 

> I'd like to clarify parts of the minutes, especially what I was trying

> to convey when I spoke.

> 

> > Ron Monzillo Shouldnt we agree as a TC whether we want to
do work 

> > before discussing changing the charter. There is disagreement
on what 

> > the wording of charter means.

> 

> and how can we decide if the charter needs to be changed without first

> coming to a common understanding

> and agreement of what work it is that we want to test against the
scope 

> of the charter.

> 

> > Ron  There are different aspects to policy  Policy about
binding to 

> > different parts; the way different types of policy are used;
Domain 

> > specific policy. We need to understand how to use this. I support
the 

> > idea that the different parts should be done. 

> 

> I described 3 different aspects of the policy/qop space, suggested
that 

> the different

> aspects would likely fall into the charter of different forums, and

> stated that

> in my view, the WSS TC has responsability in the last area.

> 

> . The advertisement or binding of requirements and capabilities

> to service definitions (eg. WSDL) and invocations.

> . The domain independent requirements and capabilities model or framework

> . The domain specific representation of requirements and capabilities
in

> support of the use of the wss security mechanisms

> 

> > Ron Monzilla  ...

> 

> Monzillo -

> 

> > Ron  Where are we? We should decide on the nature of the work
before 

> > the form it should take. Experience in the space for .host and
DNS are 

> > good examples....

> 

> because they demonstrate precedent for evolution of the methods used
for 

> exchanging

> such information between systems.

> 

> > Tim  Im seeking two assurances  1. IBM & Micro feel
the time is 

> > right to form a TC 2. Both will participate  Assure not too
clear on 

> > #2. Would accept friendly amendment if both assurances are given.

> 

> Do the minutes accurately capture the assurances that were requested
and 

> those that were offered?

> I thought there was another aspect of the request relating to what
the 

> new TC would accept as

> its inputs.

> 

> Ron

> 

> Flinn, Don wrote:

> 

> >The minutes of the 1/14/03 telecom have been corrected and are

> attached.  If there are any other corrections please send them
to the list.

> >

> >Don

> >

> > <<Minutes_1_14_03.doc>> 

> >  

> >

> 

> 

> 

> ----------------------------------------------------------------

> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription

> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>