[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [security-services] agenda: SSTC telecon meeting tuesday 29-Oct-2002
Minutes from prior meeting... ------------------------------ http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200210/msg00028.html Agenda Items for 15-Oct-2002... ------------------------------- 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of prior meeting's minutes (see ref above) 3. Agenda bashing 4. Review of open Action Items (AIs)... ------------------- AI-2. Carlisle Adams to take the "Standardize Issuer Name Format" back to the XACML for more clear requirements and/or proposal. AI-6. Jeff to determine if conformance language around the notions of profiles vs. extensions is really an issue [still in progress (will try to before next meeting)] AI-7. Prateek & Jeff to look at Liberty provider metadata's applicability for SAML specs [in progress - can discuss on the call] AI-8. Jeff to solicit comment on draft-sstc-xmlsig-guidelines-0{2|3} from Liberty arena. [in progress - have commitment from Jonathan Sergent to review the -03 rev of the guidelines. Good news is that Liberty folk and SAML folk are on same wavelength wrt to xmldsig. ] AI-9. Scott to rev the draft-sstc-xmlsig-guidelines-02 doc to -03. [security-services] Third draft of Signature document http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200210/msg00034.html AI-10. Eve, Rob and Jeff to draft amended SSTC charter AI-11. Eve to send mail msg that wraps up resolution on fragment identifiers [security-services] Motion to approve fragment ID recommendations for1.1 http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200210/msg00026.html AI-12. Prateek to draft analysis of use of XML Encryption in SAML. AI-13. Hal to write up proposal on expressing that assertions are not to be cached [security-services] Proposed DoNotCache Condition http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200210/msg00035.html ------------------- 5. SAML v1.0 OASIS-wide vote tally can be monitored here.. http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-voting/ Have 49 Yes votes, 3 abstains, no "No"s. (tally as of tonight is down below) 6. where are we at with a SAML v1.1? todo list from item [A] of.. [security-services] Proposed, categorized To-Do list for SAML 1.x and2.0 (SAMLng/SAML.next) http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200208/msg00010.html > [A] Feasible Near-term high-priority items, and bug fixes > > - Bugs that are backwards-compatible (targeted to 1.1) > - Functionality that's backwards-compatible/orthogonal and > high-priority > - The list as a whole can be completed in 3-6 months > - Any decision that needs to be made in the short term > - the below items are in no particular order (ie unprioritized) > > - Formalizing operational agreements between sites (see Liberty > provider metadata schema (section 4 of [1]) and the saml-dev > work [2], for examples; this is guidance/facilitation work rather > than protocol work) [A.1] - above will be initiated w/ AI-7 - who will take those results and fold-in what was learned from the SAML interop event? > - WS-Security profile ([3], possibly to go to WSS TC) [A.2] - done. > - Figure out versioning of modularly published profile and binding > specs [A.3] - TBD. - this one has to do with how do we define and version SAML as a whole? - don't need to answer the below scenarios on this call, but need someone to sign up to consider the question and write a proposal - presently we refer to the "SAML v1.0 specification set", and have "version" elements in assertions, request msg, and response msg. what should we do if we eg rev the bindings and profiles spec in the future, w/o making changes to -core ? what should we do if we write a separate b2b profile spec -- what's the version of that spec once approved as a OASIS std, say? > - Sharpen conformance language around the notions of profiles > vs. extensions [A.4] - this is AI-6, in progress > - Express that an assertion should not be cached [A.5] - proposal on the table > - Fix fragment identifier gaffe [4] [A.6] - motion on the "email floor" to close this. > - Standardize issuer name formats (request came from XACML) [A.7] - this is AI-2 > - Fix xmldsig issues (might turn out to be a [B] item) [5] [A.8] - for 1.1, this will be addressed by Scott's dsig doc (yes?) 7. Discussion of xmldsig guidelines 8. Discussion of credentials collection (?) 9. any other business? 10. adjourn ---- SAML voting Tally -- thanks to Eve Maler SAML 1.0 voting: 30 September 2002 - 31 October 2002 http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-voting/ Waveset: yes Cyclone Commerce: yes Griffin Consulting: abstain RSA: yes BEA: yes Sun: yes Entegrity: yes Bank of America: yes CA: yes EAN: abstain HP: yes Entrust: yes SAP: yes Overxeer: yes Quadrasis (Hitachi): yes U.S. DoJ: yes MTG Management Consultants: yes Sigaba: yes Netegrity: yes Bowstreet: yes Kinzan: yes Cincom: yes Federal Reserve: yes Sonic Software: yes VeriSign: yes Fujitsu: yes MSI Business Solutions: yes Xtradyne: yes Cognitran: yes UnitSpace: abstain Ascio: yes Authentica: yes Mercator: yes U.S. GSA: yes XML Global: yes CrossLogix: yes Microsoft: yes Sterling: yes Boeing: yes Iona: yes OpenNetwork: yes Oracle: yes Nokia: yes CommerceOne: yes IBM: yes Sybase: yes lmi.org: yes Navy: yes epeople: yes Argonne: yes Cisco: yes SeeBeyond: yes Total as of 29 October 2002 0030h PT: 49 yes, 3 abstain
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC