[KI-LC] Proposal for Trust Framework Coordination - Input Requested

j stollman stollman.j at gmail.com
Thu Mar 3 19:06:23 EST 2011


It is my impression that the proposed sub-committee will be unable to
achieve its mission.  First, for the sub-committee to be effective, it will
need to include members actively engaged in each of the work groups creating
framework components.  This will present a new administrative burden for
people already spread thin to work on their component frameworks.

Second, the ultimate trust framework is larger than the scope of the current
KI efforts.  This suggests that no matter how effective the sub-committee is
in coordinating current KI efforts, there will remain large, undefined gaps
in the overall model that will keep the components from achieving their
imagined effectiveness.

Third, no tools currently exist to support the coordination effort.  We will
be left with only emotional pressure to "manage" the scope and approaches of
each component framework.  We will not have a scientific process for
prioritizing scope and approaches.

In my view, the way to achieve the desired coordination requires the

   1. Develop a draft Trust Framework Meta Model (TFW-MM) that includes all
   trust relationships among all potential parties to a transaction (any
   transaction).   This effort, in and of itself will take several months.
   Rainer Horbe and I have been pursuing this already (with consider help from
   Ken Dagg), but we have only been able to touch the tip of the iceberg.
   2. Vet the draft by disseminating it to a wide range of interested
   parties in order to uncover as many issues as possible.
   3. Revise the model to address issues raised in the review.
   4. Require each of the work groups developing relevant framework
   components to map their efforts using the TFW-MM.
   5. Perform a gap and overlap analysis of the various framework
   6. Work with the framework work groups to resolve gaps and overlaps.

Until we complete Step 3 above, I don't know how much a sub-committee will
be able to accomplish.  This is a multiple person-month effort.

The only way to expedite Steps 1-3 is to fund the development of the draft
model.  This will move the effort from a "free time" effort to a "full time"
effort.  I recognize the problems inherent in having KI fund this
development, which is why I have been looking elsewhere for sponsors.  If KI
can help us identify sponsors and obtain funding, we could expedite

There might be other approaches, but just creating a new sub-committee
doesn't necessarily accomplish the desired mission.

Thank you.


On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Joni Brennan <joni at ieee-isto.org> wrote:

> Dear LC,
> As discussed on yesterday's LC call, John and I have worked up a proposal
> for how to better coordinate all of the Trust Framework (TF) touching groups
> in Kantara.  In summary we are proposing a LC Sub-Committee to coordinate
> these activities with leadership from each contributing group as the
> constitution of the LC Sub-Committee.  Please see the proposal [1] and send
> back your thoughts, adds, edits, deletes.  I'm hopeful that formation of
> this SC will lead us to better coordination, collaboration and messaging
> overall.
> http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/LC/Draft+Proposal+-+LC+Trust+Framework+Coordination+Sub-Committee
> Thanks for your thoughts,
> =Joni
> Joni Brennan
> Kantara Initiative | Executive Director
> voice:+1 732-226-4223
> email: joni @ ieee-isto.org
> gtalk: jonibrennan
> skype: upon request
> Join the conversation on the community@ list -
> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/community
> _______________________________________________
> LC mailing list
> LC at kantarainitiative.org
> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/lc

Jeff Stollman
stollman.j at gmail.com
1 202.683.8699
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kantarainitiative.org/pipermail/lc/attachments/20110303/2938f1db/attachment.html 

More information about the LC mailing list