JB commented that the BoT would like to get a more accurate view of the issues, activities, and challenges that the groups face, and evaluate where the resources should go. So, the BoT requested her to create a channel of getting a view across the different groups to have a better understanding of the situation.
She stressed that the 2 KI highest-level projects are UMA and IAWG.
KD raised concern on the lack of regular attendance the group has; there are only about 6 participants on a regular basis.
JB pointed out that the IAWG could have a more interesting and broader mandate than maintaining the SAC.
It was suggested to differentiate tactical group from operational group, and add policy discussion and more outreach. In this sense, it was pointed out that it could be 2 groups one for maintenance and other for the exploration of new areas of interest and/or innovation (e.x. create a library of IAWG innovation corner; use case sessions, etc.).
It was introduced the idea of IAF for business in order to attract more stakeholders to the community and simplify the adoption, provide the SAC with a business profile.
SS suggested inviting Angela Ray to talk about public computing terminal registering users (trusted terminal).
SS commented that it would be good to re-write the SAC, describe the assurance levels with the requirements and turn it into a excel spreadsheet.
It was stressed that the spreadsheet could also work as a supplemental package for readiness, and it will make the IAF more readable and comprehensive. The plan might include getting the KI accredited assessors involved, consider a notification plan for the community (explaining that it does not change the requirements), then vote in the IAWG and after that publish it.
JB highlighted that she can help convincing the BoT and LC to have more resources if needed. She added that Ruth Puente will support the group as PM.
Next Steps and Action Items