RE: FW: LDUP engineering group on access control

It is my intent that the members of the Design
Team confer and present a proposal to the WG for
a clear, terse mission statement that would bound
the scope of their subsequent work, should any such
work actually occur in the future. And that in addition,
the Design Team will propose a set of milestones/deliverables
or their own "mini-charter." The WG would then attempt
to achieve consensus on the mission statement and
"mini-charter" in the same way that we deal with any
other discussion topic. Whether or not that consensus
includes adding some or all of those milestones and/or
deliverables to the WG charter is a matter that will
have to be discussed once we have a clear work program
Proposal from the Design Team.

So, I suppose you could indeed say that this Design
Team, for the time being, is merely going to bound
the problem(s) that need to be solved related to Access
Control for LDUP and also to suggest a work program that
may or may not be added to the WG charter at a later
date.

Just so that its really clear, here's what's happening:

1) The Design Team will discuss and document a clear
mission statement (I called it something like
"scope of work" in an earlier e-mail) about
what they are specifically seeking to accomplish
related to addressing Access Control in the Context
of LDUP.

2) The Design Team will discuss and document a proposed
work program that seeks to accomplish the mission defined
in the mission statement.

3) Results from 1) and 2) will be presented to the
WG for consideration at the WG meeting and discussed
further on the mailing list.

4) A revised WG Charter, capturing changes discussed
on the list and during the last WG meeting will be
drafted and posted to the WG Mailing list. It will
include a milestone for the formation of a Design Team
to determine how access control should be addressed as
well as a milestone for their initial report to the
WG with proposals consistent with 1) and 2) above.

5) If a consensus can be achieved while discussion mentioned
in 3) is taking place that we should add the Design Team's
proposal to the WG Charter, we will add the resulting
Design Team mission statement to the WG charter proposal
along with any deliverables/milestones that will be
performed by members of the Design Team going forward.

This process has already started via off-list
e-mail exchange as is typical with Design Teams.

Also, Rick Huber reminded me that he was willing to
be a member of the Design Team as well. It was my
error in omitting his name from the list of volunteers.

Design Team members: please include Rick Huber on
all LDUP Access Control Design Team discussion.

Chris Apple

[email protected]

-----Original Message-----
From: Kurt D. Zeilenga [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 7:04 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: FW: LDUP engineering group on access control


Chris,

It is not clear to me what the purpose of this design
team is.  If it sole purpose is to make suggestions
regarding a charter revision, that's fine.

However, a number of your statements imply to me that
this design team is to (or may at its choosing) undertake
LDAP ACM engineering work (including producing I-Ds).
The LDUP WG is not chartered to undertake work in this
area at present.

I ask that you provide a clear terse mission statement
for this design team.

Thanks, Kurt


At 02:32 PM 2002-02-27, Chris Apple wrote:
>FYI. Ed Reed will be joining the list of folks below in addressing the 
>access control needs for LDUP. I would also like to invite Steven Legg 
>to participate as an active member of the Design Team for LDUP Access 
>Control since he has chosen to publish a couple of individual 
>contribution drafts on this topic recently.
> 
>After much deliberation over language in various charter proposals, 
>John and I feel that the best way that this topic can be handled in a 
>revised LDUP WG charter is to replace all details of prior proposals 
>related to this topic with text that says we are chartering an 
>official, WG-endorsed Design Team for LDUP Access Control to come up 
>with a plan for and possibly draft specifications for the WG to 
>consider. The basic notion is that the WG needs to address a minimum 
>ACM for LDUP implementation interoperability. (Not the exact words I'll

>propose, but you get the idea).
> 
>RFC 2418, covering WG guidelines, supports the creation
>of such teams:
> 
>6.5. Design teams
>
>   It is often useful, and perhaps inevitable, for a sub-group of a
>   working group to develop a proposal to solve a particular problem.
>   Such a sub-group is called a design team.  In order for a design
team
>   to remain small and agile, it is acceptable to have closed
membership
>   and private meetings.  Design teams may range from an informal chat
>   between people in a hallway to a formal set of expert volunteers
that
>   the WG chair or AD appoints to attack a controversial problem.  The
>   output of a design team is always subject to approval, rejection or
>   modification by the WG as a whole.
> 
>John and I would like for the Design Team to settle on a "mini-charter"

>for
>this work. I plan to include in a revised WG charter proposal, a
milestone
>that this group of volunteers will present a proposed "mini-charter"
>at the upcoming working group meeting in Minneapolis. This
"mini-charter"
>MUST define a scope for the team's work (what you are and are not
>seeking to address), and SHOULD include a tentative list of milestones
and
>deliverables for the WG to consider. Those deliverables would not be
added
>to the WG charter explicitly until consensus is reached that they
should and
>the ADs approve such actions. Since I'm still among the unemployed (but
a
>few qualified leads in the pipeline lately :), I have the cycles to
help out productively
>and would like to be included in the pre-Minneapolis discussions that
the Design
>Team for LDUP Access Control has. My schedule is more or less
>wide open for conference calls if that's what we'd like to do. Also, I
plan to
>be in Minneapolis as early as 3/16 and am largely free to meet
face-to-face
>about the topic while in town. Phone contact information for me is
available in
>the attached vCard.
> 
>Design Team on LDUP Access Control membership:
> 
>Tim Hahn - ([email protected]) - IBM
>Matt Hirsch ([email protected]) - NSA 
>James Benedict ([email protected]) - no affiliation given
>Ed Reed
>Steven Legg (if available)
>
>Chris Apple
>
>[email protected]
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Timothy Hahn [mailto:[email protected]] 
>Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 10:36 AM
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: LDUP engineering group on access control
>
>
>Chris,
>
>Has this engineering group been set up yet?
>
>From my append to the mailing list, I have heard responses (offering to

>participate) from:
>
>        Tim Hahn - ([email protected]) - IBM 
>        Matt Hirsch ([email protected]) - NSA 
>        James Benedict ([email protected]) - no affiliation given
>
>Do you know of others?
>
>Regards,
>Tim Hahn
>
>Internet: [email protected]
>Internal: Timothy Hahn/Endicott/IBM@IBMUS or IBMUSM00(HAHNT)
>phone: 607.752.6388     tie-line: 8/852.6388
>fax: 607.752.3681

BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:2.1
N:Apple;Christopher
FN:Chris Apple ([email protected])
TEL;HOME;VOICE:(215) 873-0850
TEL;CELL;VOICE:(610) 585-4241
ADR;WORK:;;214 New Street, Apt 4-N;Philadelphia;PA;19106;United States of America
LABEL;WORK;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:214 New Street, Apt 4-N=0D=0APhiladelphia, PA 19106=0D=0AUnited States of Am=
erica
EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:[email protected]
REV:20011217T233830Z
END:VCARD