Chairs: Donald Eastlake and Joseph Reagle
Note Taker: Joseph Reagle
- *Donald Eastlake 3rd, IBM, <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- *Joseph Reagle, W3C, <email@example.com>
- *David Solo, Citigroup, <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- *Barb Fox, Microsoft, <bfox@Exchange.Microsoft.com>
- *Phillip M Hallam-Baker, VeriSign Inc, <email@example.com>
- *Peter Lipp, IAIK TU Graz,<Peter.Lipp@iaik.at>
- *James Nicholson, Netscape, <>
- *Mark Bartel, JetForm Corporation, firstname.lastname@example.org
- *John M. Boyer, UWI.com, <email@example.com>
- *Ed Simon , Entrust Technologies Inc., <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- *Peter Chen, L.S.U., <email@example.com>
- *Richard Brown, GSU, <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- *Hiroshi Maruyama, IBM, <MARUYAMA@jp.ibm.com>
- *Brian Lamachia, Microsoft, <email@example.com>
- Reference Documents:
- Resulting Document:
Review Outstanding Action Items
Don Eastlake/Joseph Reagle to propose a time for conference calls within a week
Joseph Reagle produce another version of requirements document based on comments for
consensus poll within 1.5 weeks.
Joseph Reagle to define how many documents are required and author/editor policy within
Dave Solo to post Brown/Solo/Fox proposal
Don Eastlake to fix date and place for face to face meeting. Will send more info on
- Open: Working Group Members to review canonicalization document when posted in two
- Open: Working Group Members to review and comment (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xmldsig-signature-comments-00.txt)
Agenda and Open Issues
Time of Conference Calls
- Continue with present time: Thursdays at 4 ET. Reagle will work to find an earlier time
if possible that is more convenient for Europeans. The time is likely to be inconvenient
for Hiroshi in Japan regardless. Presently, Lipp is the only European involved, Reagle is
willing to conference him in from his home.
- While it is useful to have proposals handy as they provide a nice instriument of
consideration it is easier to build a document and WG concensus by starting with a small
document/outline and growing the issues, consensus, and accepted proposals from it. Also,
it means -- even with a crufty document with holes -- that everything has some status with
respect to WG consensus, so it is easier to get external comment/feedback.
Outline of Core Syntax Document
- Reagle/Brown(990804): will work to produce an outline of the core spec
- Just the core part that we can plug things into. Define companion specifications if
- Requirements document should be included by reference.
Core Syntax Proposal
- Solo/Brown/Fox (990804): will work to have a rough document of alternative syntax.
- It would be nice to have a document that describes the scenarious we are addressing.
parralell, cascade, message parts, documents, PDU (protocol data units)
- Boyer (990804): volunteers as editor, create draft scenario.
- Boyer: scenario that demonstrates weakenesses in manifest mechanism.
- Boyer: Look to Brown: for scenarios such as how to construct a receipt
- Eastlake: IOTP scenario.
- Lamachia/MS: protocol scenario
- Reagle(990804): create rough data model
- Reagle: convene a call if necessary.
- Brown: scan in data model diagram and send to Reagle.
- Hiroshi and Chen: willing to work on data model.
Carry-Over and New Action Items
Don Eastlake (990723): to fix date and place for face to face meeting .
- Open: WGMembers (990804): review canonicalization document when posted
- Open: Reagle: Find an ealier time if possible for teleconf.
- Open: Reagle/Brown(990804): will work to produce an outline of the core spec
- Open: Solo/Brown/Fox (990804): will work to have a rough document of alternative syntax.
- Open: Boyer (990804): volunteers as editor, create draft scenario.
- Open: Reagle(990804): create rough data model