[KI-LC] New version of Operating Procedures

Colin Wallis Kantara colin at kantarainitiative.org
Fri Oct 12 21:26:40 UTC 2018


OK, so in essence, I think Andrew is advocating that;

1) the IPR review and Public comment period can be reduced or removed by a
Supermajority vote of the LC under circumstances where there are non
significant changes.

2) the All Member Ballot can be removed by a Supermajority vote of the LC *but
it cannot be reduced, *under circumstances where there are non significant
changes.

Have I understood this correctly?

Cheers
Colin


On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 9:23 AM Andrew Hughes <andrewhughes3000 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Returning to the rationale for a) Public Comment, b) IPR Review and c)
> All-Member Ballot:
> a) to improve document quality
> b) to receive patent and copyright notifications
> c) to get Kantara Member endorsement
>
> The durations of each were set to either align with similar processes at
> other standards developing organizations or to allow for our members'
> normal business timelines to be able to address the topic presented.
>
> In the case of the SAC updates, the IAWG has determined that there is low
> risk of increased risk of bad quality; and low risk of new patent and
> copyright issues. This leads me to suggest that elimination of the public
> comment and IPR review periods is OK.
> Also, the IAWG has determined that the changes are minor and non-material
> (meaning that the changes should not break implementations against the
> criteria) - so no AMB is needed.
>
> *Andrew Hughes *CISM CISSP
> *In Turn Information Management Consulting*
>
> o  +1 650.209.7542
> m +1 250.888.9474
> 1249 Palmer Road, Victoria, BC V8P 2H8
> AndrewHughes3000 at gmail.com
> *https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-hughes-682058a
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-hughes-682058a>*
> *Digital Identity | International Standards | Information Security *
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 10:14 AM Colin Wallis Kantara <
> colin at kantarainitiative.org> wrote:
>
>> Thanks both
>>
>> Trying to parse Andrew's comment...
>> I think it is that he suggests the modification to the Ops Procs would be
>> that certain 'non material' (here we go again with needing clearly defining
>> the terms at the outset) changes would not be subject to an AMB, and just
>> voted as a super - majority of the LC.
>> If that's the case, it might be better to revise the current wording of
>> the Note for the reduction in Public Comment and IPR Review Period, so that
>> it captures both PC and IPR RP and AMB consistently.
>> Off hand, I can't think of a situation where we might have a need for an
>> AMB but zero PC and IPR RP (as the OPs Procs are currently written), so I
>> think if the latter is Zero, the AMB is not applicable. If we have a
>> reduced PC and IPR RP for whatever reason, we could conceivably have no
>> AMB, but I think it is getting marginal. What we cannot have, is a reduced
>> AMB.
>> So the options we shoud allow are:
>> 1) zero PC and IPR RP with no AMB.
>> 2) reduced PC and IPR RP with normal AMB
>> 3) normal 45 day PC and IPR RP and normal 15 day AMB.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> Executive Director
>> Cell: +44 (0)7490 266 778
>> @KantaraColin
>> Kantara Consent Receipt and UMA are 2 of the top 5
>> <https://identiverse.com/2017/12/18/five-identity-trends-watch-2018/>
>> Kantara Initiative <https://kantarainitiative.org/>, Kantara Educational
>> Foundation <https://edufoundation.kantarainitiative.org> & Kantara Europe
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 5:50 AM Andrew Hughes <andrewhughes3000 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Ken - I understand the need, but don’t think it serves us well to
>>> allow instant turn-around all-member ballots.
>>>
>>> AMBs are not only to register positive approvals, but also to register
>>> objections. It would be a difficult position to defend if a member was
>>> unavailable for one day, missed both the call and close of a ballot, then
>>> tried to object.
>>>
>>> A quirk of numbers is that the entire LC could almost make AMB quorum,
>>> especially if a couple more groups are created.
>>>
>>> So it might just be better to allow LC to approve such things directly
>>> rather that pretending to increase oversight by AMB.
>>>
>>> Andrew.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:54 AM Ken Dagg <kendaggtbs at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Andrew,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Based on IAWG’s attempt to publish the recent revisions it made to the
>>>> IAF SAC, I would like to suggest the following modification to Section
>>>> 7.7.1.3 (All-Member Ballot for Recommendation Approval) of the Operating
>>>> Procedures. This modification will enable the LC to authorize a zero day
>>>> All-Member Ballot period for revisions that have no impact on affected
>>>> parties (e.g., CSPs or Assessors). The impact of the revision will allow
>>>> revisions to be put into place as soon as possible to meet operational
>>>> requirements.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ken
>>>>
>>>> ================
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> SECTION 7.7.1.3: All-Member Ballot for Recommendation Approval
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The LC Secretary shall then initiate the All-Member Ballot. This ballot
>>>> shall be conducted electronically and shall be open for a minimum of 15
>>>> days.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The voting record by the All-Member ballot shall be publicly available
>>>> upon completion of the ballot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> NOTE: The LC can, by Super Majority vote of the LC, reduce the duration
>>>> of the All-Member Ballot period for non-material editorial changes to a
>>>> Kantara Initiative Candidate Recommendation. The decision must take into
>>>> consideration the impact of changes on affected parties (e.g., CSPs,
>>>> Assessors). The decision and rationale shall be reported to the Board of
>>>> Directors at the next Board of Directors meeting.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A notice describing the All-Member Ballot period reduction shall be
>>>> included as part of the voting record for the All-Member ballot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 11:44 PM Andrew Hughes <
>>>> andrewhughes3000 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi everyone: Ken Dagg, Colin and I have been working on a new set of
>>>>> Operating Procedures that align to the current version of Bylaws and also
>>>>> incorporate a bunch of new material on publication processes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's the final draft version - I don't expect you to read the whole
>>>>> thing - but please skim through if you have 30 minutes or so sometime - we
>>>>> have untangled some difficult text and hopefully clarified how certain
>>>>> procedures should be performed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Once this is through all the approvals, it will be converted to HTML &
>>>>> short task-based index pages will be created (for example a page for the
>>>>> regular operation of a Work Group could be made - including all the things
>>>>> you need to know how to do as a Chair/Vice)
>>>>>
>>>>> andrew.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Andrew Hughes *CISM CISSP
>>>>> *In Turn Information Management Consulting*
>>>>>
>>>>> o  +1 650.209.7542
>>>>> m +1 250.888.9474
>>>>> 1249 Palmer Road, Victoria, BC V8P 2H8
>>>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=1249+Palmer+Road,%C2%A0Victoria,+BC+V8P+2H8&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>>>> AndrewHughes3000 at gmail.com
>>>>> *https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-hughes-682058a
>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-hughes-682058a>*
>>>>> *Digital Identity | International Standards | Information Security *
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> LC mailing list
>>>>> LC at kantarainitiative.org
>>>>> https://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/lc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> Kenneth Dagg Independent Consultant Identification and Authentication
>>>> 613-825-2091 kendaggtbs at gmail.com
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Andrew Hughes CISM CISSP
>>> In Turn Information Management Consulting
>>> o  +1 650.209.7542 m +1 250.888.9474
>>> 1249 Palmer Road, Victoria, BC V8P 2H8
>>> AndrewHughes3000 at gmail.com
>>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-hughes-682058a
>>> Digital Identity | International Standards | Information Security
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LC mailing list
>>> LC at kantarainitiative.org
>>> https://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/lc
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kantarainitiative.org/pipermail/lc/attachments/20181012/8a37adcd/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the LC mailing list