Re: [VoT] IPR disclosures

Regardless of the WG, both IETF and OpenId Foundations are international orgs.  The specs have to work globally. 

VoT should work for Paul's cases AND everyone else. 

Phil

> On Nov 23, 2017, at 8:36 PM, John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> wrote:
> 
> We should probably try and keep the VOT and iGov discussions separate.  
> 
> IGov's use of VOT should largly be on the iGov mailing list at the OIDF.  VOT is only a small reference in iGov.  If that needs to be expanded then discuss over there.  
> 
> This list is for the core VOT spec, and it's fitness to purpose.    
> 
> Concrete examples of profiles for security token trust that cannot be accommodated by VOT would be helpful when making points that the spec is inadiquate in some way.  
> 
> Taking off yet again, so out of communication for at least 12h.
> 
> John B.  
> 
>> On Nov 23, 2017 11:17 PM, "Grassi, Paul A. (Fed)" <paul.grassi@nist.gov> wrote:
>> As the USG rep, I can confidently state that the use case this version supports is 90% of our use cases. Don’t hold us up for the last 10%. That 10% will be amazing, but can come later. What is being asked for is gold-plating, not something that if not done means we are wrong.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Paul
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> From: Chris Drake <Chris.Drake@CryptoPhoto.com>
>> Date: Thursday, November 23, 2017 at 10:49 PM
>> To: "Grassi, Paul A. (Fed)" <paul.grassi@nist.gov>, Phil Hunt <phil.hunt@oracle.com>
>> Cc: John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>, Leif Johansson <leifj@sunet.se>, Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu>, "vot@ietf.org" <vot@ietf.org>
>> Subject: Re: [VoT] IPR disclosures
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I'm on the side of "get it right".  OpenID swept a similar range of topics into the "out of scope" basket, which rendered their first standard so unusable they had to come back and do a second one.
>> 
>> Lets at least learn from history, and build something *effectively useable* out of the gate.
>> 
>> You can't drive unsafe or inappropriate cars on any roads, let alone in a SAML lane.  Nobody cares *how* it goes wrong, they just care that it did - so it's our job to look ahead and watch out for those obstacles now; rather than shroud them in SEP.
>> 
>> Kind Regards,
>> Chris Drake
>> 
>> 
>> Friday, November 24, 2017, 1:27:18 PM, Grassi, Paul A. (Fed) wrote:
>> 
>> Fine. But as I have said you want a unicorn when we just want a car that can drive in the same Lane as SAML. Your unicorn is coming, as the phases of igov include international agreement on vot vectors/values and attribute metadata to assert 'assurance' of attributes that are unrelated to proofing.  
>> 
>> I happy for your contribution don't take unicorn comment poorly. Just a quick post turkey dinner way of making a point. Happy US Thanksgiving. 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On Nov 23, 2017, at 5:25 PM, Phil Hunt <phil.hunt@oracle.com> wrote:
>> 
>> The issue i am concerned about then is that by leaving out the issue of claims than the vot is incomplete and would require a separate statement. 
>> 
>> This leads to a lot of interop and complexity problems down the road.  Which value wins etc given they would overlap. 
>> 
>> The vot does not have to address it now but it should have the capability to do so (that may not be possible without a model). 
>> 
>> This is a lot like when we found loa was actually multi dimensional and it had to dramatically change.  IAL falls into the same problem. 
>> 
>> Phil
>> 
>> On Nov 23, 2017, at 2:08 PM, Leif Johansson <leifj@sunet.se> wrote:
>> 
>> On 2017-11-23 21:23, John Bradley wrote:
>> 
>> Authors,
>> 
>> As part of the write-up for the Vectors of trust document, we need an
>> 
>> IPR disclosure from all of you.
>> 
>> Are you aware of any IPR related to the following VOT document?
>> 
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dricher-2Dvectors-2Dof-2Dtrust_%26d%3DDwIGaQ%26c%3DRoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE%26r%3Dna5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA%26m%3DQbLS61Tkq_l46PCZqD5dxO1fLIa4bYOrGBHGDtJrGNY%26s%3DMzyyadRifkHa-POatwYHEwdNoC7wUj777DGKpyRF2RE%26e&data=02%7C01%7Cpaul.grassi%40nist.gov%7Cab4db3d0fc7a4643a7af08d532c119eb%7C2ab5d82fd8fa4797a93e054655c61dec%7C1%7C0%7C636470727310173986&sdata=1dkeGx37WKNwiWfLzR5YNC4KBjqYWqVnt%2B%2FOt7ArqvE%3D&reserved=0=
>> 
>> Please reply to the list.  
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> John B. 
>> 
>> I am not.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 
>> vot mailing list
>> 
>> vot@ietf.org
>> 
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_vot%26d%3DDwIGaQ%26c%3DRoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE%26r%3Dna5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA%26m%3DQbLS61Tkq_l46PCZqD5dxO1fLIa4bYOrGBHGDtJrGNY%26s%3DvMBbg4PMZy1qgq6VilC4_SKh4m6b5wkecJsTBKu6txU%26e&data=02%7C01%7Cpaul.grassi%40nist.gov%7Cab4db3d0fc7a4643a7af08d532c119eb%7C2ab5d82fd8fa4797a93e054655c61dec%7C1%7C0%7C636470727310173986&sdata=kSRrzffFE6tfhI5p%2F4bk5qXC23kK%2BlMjSa34zlyqaZY%3D&reserved=0=
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> vot mailing list
>> vot@ietf.org
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fvot&data=02%7C01%7Cpaul.grassi%40nist.gov%7Cab4db3d0fc7a4643a7af08d532c119eb%7C2ab5d82fd8fa4797a93e054655c61dec%7C1%7C0%7C636470727310173986&sdata=6OwTIaa5BjmDXJU4vAzBWtOSbH1Zpav4J6O1Ume7Ra0%3D&reserved=0
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> vot mailing list
> vot@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vot