LC telecon 2012-06-20

Date and Time

• Date: Wednesday, 20 June 2012
• Time: 13:00 PT | 16:00 ET | 20:00 UTC (time chart)
• Call-in toll-free number: 1-866-203-0920
• Call-in number: 1-206-445-0056
  
  • Conference Code: 5423695925#
• International Dial-In Numbers

Agenda

1. Roll Call
2. Approve 2012-05-09 Minutes
3. Administration:
   
   1. Executive Director report
   2. Action Item Review
   3. Quarterly Reports
   4. LC Vice-Chair Vote
4. Discussion
   1. AMDG report discussion
   2. By-Laws & OPs
   3. Identity & Attribute combined group coordination (P3WG, HIAWG, IAWG, AMDG)
   4. KI position paper: NSTIC Steering Group Formation v0.2
5. WG Updates
6. BoT Liaison Representative Update
7. AOB
8. Adjourn

Attendees

• Pete Palmer
• Myisha Frazier-McElveen 
• Patrick Curry
• John Bradley
• Bob Pinheiro
• Colin Soutar
• Tom Smedinghoff
• Colin Wallis
  
  

Quorum is 6 of 11 as of 06 June 2012.

Staff:

Secretary:

•  Heather Flanagan

Non-voting:

• Heather Flanagan
• Sal D'Agostino

Apologies:

• Eve Maler
• Joni Brennan

Minutes & Notes

Administration: Approve 2012-05-09 Minutes

No discussion: Motion to approve the minutes by Bob Pinheiro, seconded by Colin Wallis - minutes pass by unanimous consent

Administration: Executive Director report

Joni unavailable at this time

Administration: Action Item Review

New Action Items

Administration: Quarterly Reports

• Q2 reports due: 31 July, 2012

• Currently only ones overdue are: Information Sharing WG and Open Source Support WG

Administration: LC Vice-Chair Vote

• Nomination: Colin Soutar
• motion to acclaim Colin Soutar as LC Vice-Chair by John Bradley; seconded by Patrick Curry; no objection, motion passed
  
  

Discussion:

AMDG  AMDG Report:

1. Is the work described in this Recommendation something Kantara should be doing?

2. Should a new working group be created around this Recommendation?

3. Is there another Working Group already in existence that can/should take on this work?

Heather's suggestions:

• A new attribute working group with the mandate of defining context and clarifying use, continuing to develop the repository and clarify definitions
  
  • (Patrick) are these context community specific?  (Sal) yes, the idea is that we leverage individuals from other communities (Internet2's MACE group) to start the conversation and branch out from there
  • (Patrick) the majority of authentication attributes are reasonably well defined, the majority of primary attributes in certain communities (industry sector communities) are also reasonably well defined; ones in government seem to be fuzzy / authorization attributes; will be interested to see what already exists and what the primary bodies are that manage attributes in the individual sectors or contexts
• For the Definitions and general coordination, recommend we continue to use the cross-WG meta-group of the P3WG, IAWG, HIAWG, and the Attribute group (no new group)
• For "Trust Frameworks" gap, recommend we pass this over to the Trust Framework Meta Model WG
• For Governance, formally pass this over to the ISOC group working in this space
• For Mechanisms, perhaps the NSTIC group?  Possibly/probably not global enough; perhaps OIX?

This seems like a sensible set of directions; will need to bring back the Charter for discussion so we can get the WG in to existence; time frame for that

By-Laws & OPs

8.1.1 Member

any entity that has completed the application forms, satisfied the objective membership criteria for the Organization, executed a copy of the Member Agreement, and paid the appropriate Membership Fee as established by the Board of Trustees.  A Member may be an individual, corporation, partnership, join venture, trust, limited liability company, business association, governmental entity or other entity.

 

Member benefits include:

* Access to non-public/confidential drafts through the Kantara Initiative liaison agreements and relationships

                1. I don't recall there being a confidentiality clause in the Kantara membership agreement that is the flow-through of our (Kantara's) obligation to third parties.   We may consider adding a               clause in the membership agreement to this effect.

* Eligibility for positions on the Leadership Council

                2. Is this true for members that are not Officers of an WG/DG?

* Listing of Member Logo on web roster

* Ability to sponsor Work/Discussion Group formation

* Ability to request directed funding without overhead

All the Board subcommittees and specific liaison with ITU-T and ISO have confidentiality agreements; anyone who is a member can asked to be part of a subcommittee, but you must be a subcommittee member to see the agreements; anyone who is a member can apply for this

There is no requirement that an Officer of a WG or DG be a Kantara Member, so the "Eligibility for positions on the Leadership Council" is not accurate

More By-Laws & OPs

Operating Procedures - Nominations

Procedures for handling nominations to any leadership position are not laid out in the OP.  Are there any categories of Members/Participants that are NOT allowed to be nominated in to a position?  Should there be a minimum nomination period?  Can anyone submit a nomination?  Need to clarify these things.

                3. As per my comment 2 above.

Caveat may be the Board of Trustees liaison - they must be members; no other leadership position requires any particular category of membership or participation

More By-Laws & OPs

4. I’d like to suggest that the following text be considered with regards to voting.   The changes I have suggested would be generally consistent with operating procedures in SDO’s; would give some notice to the delinquent Participant of the impending action; and would avoid any perception of the ability for members to “vote hop”.   Even though we have not suffered from this at all, the perception of the ability to attain voting rights “at will” in light of an “interesting” agenda item, I believe would be better removed, and is more respectful of the active body of the membership.

 

3.7

OLD

All Participants present at a WG meeting are voting members of the WG. For the purpose of maintaining a reasonable ability to achieve Quorum, any Participant in a WG who fails to attend two consecutive meetings of the WG may, at the discretion of the Chair, be re-classified as a non-voting member. Voting member status may be reacquired by attending a meeting of the WG. In the case of an electronic vote of the WG, if the electronic vote is initiated while a Participant is in non-voting status, the Participant may not vote in that electronic vote.

 

PROPOSED

All Participants present at a WG meeting are voting members of the WG, unless they have elected to be non-voting Participants.   For the purpose of ensuring an active membership base is maintained,  any Participant in a WG who fails to attend two consecutive meetings of the WG may, at the discretion of the Chair, be re-classified as a non-voting member.    Such re-classification shall be stated in the agenda of the meeting in which it takes affect.   Voting member status may be re-acquired by attending a meeting of the WG, in which case the voting member status is effective at the conclusion of the meeting.   In the case of an electronic vote of the WG, if the electronic vote is initiated while a Participant is in non-voting status, the Participant may not vote in that electronic vote.

 

If adopted, this revised text would likely be similarly appropriate for clause 2.6 relating to the LC.

Implications include: you'll have to look at the Roster and figure out who has been attending, who is in what voting status, etc; there will be more overhead

This is to help avoid someone joining a call just to vote on an item in their interest and otherwise not participating; it provides a more stable membership base

As long as there isn't automatic reinstatement - they have to ask for the voting rights back; "upon request of the Participant"

More By-Laws & OPs

By-Laws - IPR and Copyright

May want to review whether it is reasonable for KI to continue with the model of WG/DG deciding their own IPR.  Perhaps have a base IPR policy explicitly mentioned in the By-laws and allow WG/DG to do something different if explained/required?

 

CW: Noting that no-one has commented on this which I find surprising. I guess no comment means the status quo continues which I think is more transparent than the baseline/exception alternative.

Any WG or DG needs to have an IPR declaration, and having a baseline one is probably not necessary; how would you find out where the exceptions are?

Next step - revise text based on conversation, post to list to judge consensus, and have Joni take this to the Trustees

Identity & Attribute combined group coordination (P3WG, HIAWG, IAWG, AMDG)

Leadership to meet Aug 6, general participation Aug 7, 8, hosted at Surescripts; mark your calendars if you are interested in attending

Reminder that one topic will be a new Attribute Management WG draft charter discussed

This may be turning in to a general KI face-to-face meeting, since it covers so much of the membership anyway; there are several hotels within walking distance of the offices next to Crystal City, in Arlington, VA

KI position paper: NSTIC Steering Group Formation v0.2

No time; Will continue on list and/or next call

WG Updates

No time

BoT Liason Report

No time

AOB

Note that next meeting is scheduled for 4 July, 2012 - move or cancel?

Adjourn

Next Meeting

• Date: Wednesday, 4 July, 2012
• Time: 13:00 PT | 16:00 ET | 20:00 UTC (time chart)