Subject: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion

From: Adam Montville <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 19:17:30 +0000

All:

Hope you're having a relaxing weekend after Vancouver!  I propose that we
meet on Monday, Tuesday, or Thursday at 08:00 Eastern for 30-60 minutes
(depending on agenda needs).  This time seems to be one that will
accommodate the most people internationally.

I'd like to get a time preference as soon as possible so we can start
meeting right away (preferably this week).  Once we generally agree on a
time slot, I will schedule a recurring WebEx.

Regards,

Adam

---

From: Stephen Hanna <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 20:59:21 -0400

Great! All those times are fine with me.

BTW, such a weekly call wouldn't be OK for an IETF Working Group.
Instead, we'd want to do most of our work on the email list with
occasional interim meetings, as described in this IESG statement:

https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/interim-meetings.html

However, since we don't yet have a WG or even a BOF, I don't
think there's a problem with having a weekly call as a way to
accelerate the development of a proposed charter and use cases.
Still, I think it's essential that we consider these calls
subservient to and supportive of discussions on the email list.

Thanks,

Steve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
> Adam Montville
> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2012 3:18 PM
> To: [email-masked]'
> Subject: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion
> 
> All:
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sacm mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

---

From: Adam Montville <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 13:35:07 +0000

>https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/interim-meetings.html

Thanks for the link!

>subservient to and supportive of discussions on the email list.

Steve, Thanks for pointing out that which can be lost from time to time -
the mailing list is king, and these calls are really just an effort to get
things moving quickly.

---

From: Luis Nunez <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 11:08:47 -0400

I open for the proposed times.  It may be good to have it on a Monday so that we can work on specifics during the week.

-ln

---

From: Adam Montville <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 15:20:35 +0000

How are others feeling about Mondays at 08:00 Eastern?  We would start next week and go long enough to get consensus on use cases and a draft charter - calls will augment mailing list activity and serve as high bandwidth status reporting and issue identification.

Sent from my iPhone

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 10:24:36 -0500

Personally I'd rather do this on the list. I have no problem with calls but that reduces the transparency at a time we really need it.

I will be putting out a revised agenda to the list on Wednesday with the comments and agreements we discussed in Vancouver.   If we are going to have a call I'd rather it be closer to the conclusion than each week.  I am not sure we will do ourselves any favors with calls on the charter at this point.

JMO

Kent Landfield

McAfee | An Intel Company
Direct: +1.972.963.7096
Mobile: +1.817.637.8026
Web: www.mcafee.com<http://www.mcafee.com/>

From: Luis Nunez <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Monday, August 6, 2012 10:08 AM
To: Adam Montville <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Cc: Stephen Hanna <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>, "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>'" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Subject: Re: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion

-ln

On 8/5/12 5:59 PM, "Stephen Hanna" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Adam Montville
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2012 3:18 PM
To: [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>'
Subject: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion
All:
Hope you're having a relaxing weekend after Vancouver!  I propose that
we
meet on Monday, Tuesday, or Thursday at 08:00 Eastern for 30-60 minutes
(depending on agenda needs).  This time seems to be one that will
accommodate the most people internationally.
I'd like to get a time preference as soon as possible so we can start
meeting right away (preferably this week).  Once we generally agree on
a
time slot, I will schedule a recurring WebEx.
Regards,
Adam
_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm
_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

---

From: Adam Montville <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 16:00:50 +0000

From: kent_landfield <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Monday, August 6, 2012 8:24 AM
To: "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>, Adam Montville <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Cc: "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>, "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Subject: Re: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion

It's no problem to do this on the list either, but I want to emphasize that the calls would merely be a way to keep momentum going and that it's up to us as to whether transparency is reduced.  To be clear, the intent of having calls would not be to reduce transparency.  That said, if most would prefer working from the list, then that's exactly what we should (and will) do.

I will be putting out a revised agenda to the list on Wednesday with the comments and agreements we discussed in Vancouver.

Did you mean a revised charter?

If we are going to have a call I'd rather it be closer to the conclusion than each week.

This sounds like a preference for Thursday, if calls are had.

 I am not sure we will do ourselves any favors with calls on the charter at this point.

I think the calls are intended to be checkpoints for status and to quickly identify/raise issues – think of them more along the lines of a scrum standup than a working session.  That said, I'm not sure that calls would not do the charter or use case documents a favor – perhaps to the contrary.

JMO

If that's "just my opinion," then mine too. ;-)

Kent Landfield

-ln

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 11:04:16 -0500

:-) Yes, a revised charter….  Doing too many meetings lately. ;-)

Kent Landfield

From: Adam Montville <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Monday, August 6, 2012 11:00 AM
To: Kent Landfield <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>, Luis Nunez <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Cc: "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>, "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Subject: Re: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion

From: kent_landfield <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Monday, August 6, 2012 8:24 AM
To: "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>, Adam Montville <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>
Cc: "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>, "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>
Subject: Re: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion

JMO

Kent Landfield

From: Luis Nunez <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Monday, August 6, 2012 10:08 AM
To: Adam Montville <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>
Cc: Stephen Hanna <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>, "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>'" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>
Subject: Re: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion

-ln

On 8/5/12 5:59 PM, "Stephen Hanna" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Adam Montville
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2012 3:18 PM
To: [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>'
Subject: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion
All:
Hope you're having a relaxing weekend after Vancouver!  I propose that
we
meet on Monday, Tuesday, or Thursday at 08:00 Eastern for 30-60 minutes
(depending on agenda needs).  This time seems to be one that will
accommodate the most people internationally.
I'd like to get a time preference as soon as possible so we can start
meeting right away (preferably this week).  Once we generally agree on
a
time slot, I will schedule a recurring WebEx.
Regards,
Adam
_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm
_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

---

From: Adam Montville <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 01:17:27 +0000

>
>
>
>>From: kent_landfield
>><[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
>>To: "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>"
>><[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>,
>> Adam Montville <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
>>Cc: "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>"
>><[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>,
>> "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>"
>><[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
>>Personally I'd rather do this on the list. I have no problem with calls
>>but that reduces the transparency at a time we really need it.
>>
>>Kent Landfield
>>
>>
>>To: Adam Montville
>><[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
>>Cc: Stephen Hanna <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>,
>>"[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>'"
>> <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
>>I open for the proposed times.  It may be good to have it on a Monday so
>>that we can work on specifics during the week.
>>
>>
>>-ln
>>
>>
>>On 8/5/12 5:59 PM, "Stephen Hanna"
>><[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

Any other opinions regarding doing this work exclusively on the list or
augmenting the on-list communication with weekly calls until our use cases
and/or draft charter are "done."  I'd like to see this topic come to a
close later this week, perhaps by end of day Thursday (Pacific time).

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 22:21:18 -0400

As Steve mentioned, calls could be used to accelerate the progress, so I think that would be helpful.  This won't be an option if a working group is formed, but is possible now.  I think we should take the opportunity to speed up progress and could provide minutes to the list for anyone who could not join and to provide transparency for those who join later.

Thank you,
Kathleen

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 21:40:18 -0500

Well that's what consensus is all about.  Please include me on the calls if they are set up.

Kent Landfield

From: Kathleen Moriarty <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Monday, August 6, 2012 10:21 PM
To: Adam Montville <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>, Kent Landfield <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>, Luis Nunez <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Cc: "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>, "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Subject: RE: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion

Thank you,
Kathleen

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Adam Montville
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 9:17 PM
To: [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>; [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>; [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion

From: kent_landfield
<[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Monday, August 6, 2012 8:24 AM
To: "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>"
<[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>,
Adam Montville <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>
Cc: "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>"
<[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>,
"[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>"
<[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>
Subject: Re: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion

Kent Landfield

From: Luis Nunez <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Monday, August 6, 2012 10:08 AM
To: Adam Montville
<[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>
Cc: Stephen Hanna <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>,
"[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>'"
<[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>>
Subject: Re: [sacm] Weekly Meetings for Charter and Use Case Discussion

-ln

On 8/5/12 5:59 PM, "Stephen Hanna"
<[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]><mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
Great! All those times are fine with me.

---

From: Stephen Hanna <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 05:17:24 -0400

+1

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 10:21 PM
> To: [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]
> Cc: Stephen Hanna; [email-masked]
> As Steve mentioned, calls could be used to accelerate the progress, so
> I think that would be helpful.  This won't be an option if a working
> group is formed, but is possible now.  I think we should take the
> opportunity to speed up progress and could provide minutes to the list
> for anyone who could not join and to provide transparency for those who
> join later.
> 
> Thank you,
> Kathleen
> 
> >>From: Luis Nunez
> <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>

---

From: "Brian Ford (brford)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 12:11:32 +0000

Folks,

It seems that this discussion has suddenly picked up a lot of momentum
since the creation of an interest list in late 2010.

Holding "regular weekly calls" before charter feels like it amplifies the
positions of those who facilitate and can participate in calls.  It
doesn't make this seem like an open forum.  It would be one thing if these
calls were about specific proposals or documents but otherwise it feels
like an effort to steer this work.

Liberty,

Brian

---

From: Stephen Hanna <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 10:34:16 -0400

Good point, Brian. Let's skip the whole idea of weekly calls
and move directly to working on the proposed charter and
drafts and anything else that we'll need to move this
project forward.

BTW, I'm delighted to see the surge of energy on this list.
Having a solid use case document has clearly helped a lot.

Thanks,

Steve

> From: Brian Ford (brford) [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 8:12 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: Stephen Hanna; Adam Montville; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]

---

From: Adam Montville <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 15:17:44 +0000

>drafts and anything else that we'll need to move this

Very well, then it seems that there's no need for calls and we'll conduct
all sacm-related business right here on the list.  Good!

Consequent to the Vancouver side meeting and subsequent discussion on this
list, we have the following actions (thanks to Steve Hanna for starting
this list):

1. Update the draft charter to reflect desired changes

2. Continue fleshing out the Use Case document

3. Review IPR statements from MITRE and decide whether they are acceptable.

4. Based on the controls supported by the Use Cases, we can identify gaps
in the required models and start creating some additional drafts.  This
may include the content repository draft already proposed by Dave
Waltermire and some existing, unencumbered specifications.

So far, here's what I believe to be true: Kent Landfield will update the
charter based on to-date feedback; Dave Waltermire and myself will co-edit
the Use Case document (we'll more than likely need help with this); I have
submitted a frame of reference document to this list as something that can
be either included in the Use Case document or that will stand on it's
own; I have volunteered to create a glossary, if needed (this work will
come later).  

The overall, community-imposed target deadline for this work is
mid-September, but I would feel better pushing it up to Friday, September
7.  That gives us almost five working weeks, with potentially an extra
week if we need to go to the 14th.

Kent, when do you think you'll be able to update the draft charter and
send it to the list?

Dave, how do envision moving forward with the use case document?

Finally, if anyone has any issues with the way this is being organized,
feel free to offer alternatives and/or constructive criticism.  We all
very much want this to be a community-focused effort and, while we have
some IETF veterans in the group, sacm is new to this environment.

+1

Regards,

Adam