[Openid-specs-igov] Fwd: Regarding the vote on Implementer’s Drafts of Two iGov Specifications

[John Bradley]

Forwarding a comment on the vote.

It is not uncommon for OIDF implimentors drafts to have dependencies on
ID.  As it is not uncommon for IETF WG specs to reference other drafts.

Strictly speaking vot is a AD sponsors draft so not the same status as a
Individual Draft.   Yes the IETF has mysterious ways.

To discuss the IETF process and that document the SAG list is best.

The iGov WG has had extensive conversations with NIST and the UK and
included VOT at there request.   NIST is working on a profile of VOT.

People interested in the iGov discussion with NIST should join the WG.

As document Sheppard I have been talking to NIST and others about there
ability to profile VOT.   Getting feedback on that is one of the reasons
vot has not been progressed to the IESG yet.   That will however happening
soon, unless more feedback is received in the IETF process.

Honestly the more feedback the better.   Sometimes it takes specs
referencing important work like VOT before people become aware of them.

I don't think we have a issue with the iGov implimentors draft, but others
can differ.

Regards
John B.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Prateek Mishra" <Prateek.Mishra at oracle.com>
Date: Sep 11, 2017 00:44
Subject: Fwd: Regarding the vote on Implementer’s Drafts of Two iGov
Specifications
To: "John Bradley" <ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com>, "Phil Hunt (IDM)" <
phil.hunt at oracle.com>
Cc:


>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *Prateek Mishra <Prateek.Mishra at oracle.com>
> *Subject: **Regarding the vote on Implementer’s Drafts of Two iGov
> Specifications*
> *Date: *September 10, 2017 at 10:42:35 PM PDT
> *To: *openid-specs-igov at lists.openid.net
>
> The document has a normative reference to a Vectors of Trust “standard”.
> The so called normative reference is an individual draft and has no
> standing at this time.
>
> The draft https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-richer-vectors-of-trust-05 has
> been somewhat updated to reflect NIST 800-63-3’s new components, but does
> not align.
>
> We have voted “OBJECT” on this draft and would like to see this worked
> through first.
>
> — prateek
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-igov/attachments/20170911/31c1c8af/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4383 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-igov/attachments/20170911/31c1c8af/attachment.p7s>