Yuck - does this mean we are in a copyright minefield in using anything
from X9.84?
John L
Phil Griffin wrote:
>
> John,
>
> Only the template format for X9.84 was changed to
> meet ISO requirements when it was submitted for
> fast track ballot. The fast track ballot has closed
> and the issue failed.
>
> This result is widely attributed in the US to be due
> to an orchestrated attack by the (UK) chair of SC17,
> who was trying to gather all biometric standardization
> under control of his card group. This even though
> X9.84 has far wider applicability than cards.
>
> SC 17 rebuffed offers from TC 68 to work jointly on
> progressing the US national standard, and twice sent
> out letters to its SC17 members with influence over
> or voting rights in TC68 containing suggested voting
> text that asked that the 21352 ballot be defeated and
> the document transposed to SC17.
>
> Almost all of the negative votes against 21352 contained
> this negative recommended text. But X9F has now voted to
> not provide SC17 or its US tag with any access to X9.84
> and has cautioned that the document is copyrighted. The
> response of TC68/SC2 will be determined by the SC2
> members at their next meeting in April.
>
> Meanwhile, the US has formed a new TC in the INCITS
> organization named M1 Biometrics and has asked that
> JTC1 create a new SC for all biometric standards and
> that M1 serve as the US tag. Work earmarked in the US
> for SC17 in B10 has been moved now to M1.
>
> And of course, the OASIS XCBF work has now started. And
> it will extend the current capabilities of X9.84, suggest
> changes to the ASN.1 in X9.84, and attempt to align that
> standard with the BioAPI BIR format.
>
> As a voting member of X9, I have been advocating that the
> X9.84 standard be proposed again as a NWI for normal track
> processing. If this could be done, I would wish to try to
> augment the current X9.84 document to reflect the work in
> XCBF. But there's a lot of politics involved and the way
> forward is unclear.
>
> Not closely related, but BTW. I have recently been named
> vice chair of TC68/SC2, and I will continue to serve as
> Convenor of the SC2/WG8 PKI group.
>
> Phil
>
> John Larmouth wrote:
> >
> > If I have not misunderstood, ISO DIS 21352 is the ISO equivalent of
> > X9.84.
> >
> > If that is so, then:
> >
> > 1) Surely we should be using THAT as our base, not X9.84?
> >
> > 2) When does the DIS ballot close?
> >
> > John L
> >
> > John L
> >
> > Phil Griffin wrote:
> > >
> > > John,
> > >
> > > The timing was set to give us a chance to iron
> > > out problems that might arise before our due
> > > dates for deliverables.
> > >
> > > I recall though that we had not decided at time
> > > of TC request whether to have the May 16 meeting
> > > as a face to face or by telephone. I think that
> > > at the time, just you and Bancroft and Paul and
> > > I were in the conversation, and we had no way
> > > of knowing how to judge what the interest level
> > > in the work might be.
> > >
> > > BTW. If you look back at your mail, you'll find
> > > I've placed copies of the BioAPI document and
> > > the NIST CBEFF document on my web site (as I
> > > could not post it to the XCBF web site). These
> > > will be moved to the XCBF web site this weekend.
> > >
> > > X9.84 is still only available from the ansi.org
> > > electronic bookstore.
> > >
> > > Phil
> > >
> > > John Larmouth wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Are we seriously considering a *one-day* meeting on May 16th?
> > > > (Anywhere). I don't currently have this in my diary. It was my
> > > > understanding that the XCBF would normally be meeting alongside other
> > > > meetings the majority of us were attending (such as the Barcelona UBL
> > > > meeting, or perhaps the joint UBL and X.12 meeting in early June.
> > > >
> > > > I suggest it is better to try to progress things electronically, and the
> > > > crucial first step is to get all relevant documents mailed out.
> > > >
> > > > John L
> > > >
> > > > Phil Griffin wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > When I requested the TC, I was required to specify a
> > > > > meeting schedule for the first year. OSS agreed to
> > > > > host the first meeting and provide everyone with
> > > > > the ability to dial in.
> > > > >
> > > > > OSS also agreed to host at their place in Somerset,
> > > > > NJ May 16, 2002. Bancroft, are you still game or
> > > > > would you prefer to open this up for discussion?
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm giving an XCBF pitch at the ITU-T Workshop on
> > > > > Security in Seoul, Korea on the 13th and 14th. So,
> > > > > I'll be flying back after this in order to make
> > > > > the meeting. Flying back to California instead of
> > > > > NJ would allow my brain to catch up to my body a
> > > > > little quicker.
> > > > >
> > > > > But some of the folks that helped to plan the TC
> > > > > and get it started may have already made plans.
> > > > >
> > > > > Phil
> > > > >
> > > > > Tyky Aichelen wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Forwarded by Tyky Aichelen/San Jose/IBM on 03/29/02 11:32 AM -----
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tyky Aichelen
> > > > > > To: Paul Thorpe <>
> > > > > > 03/29/02 11:13 AM cc:
> > > > > > From: Tyky Aichelen/San Jose/IBM@IBMUS
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [xcbf] Initial drafts of all deliverables(Document link: Tyky
> > > > > > Aichelen)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Great! So we have Paul and I among the volunteering hosts, on West and East
> > > > > > coasts.
> > > > > > It would be nice if we can map out tentative Face-to-Face schedule for the
> > > > > > rest of 2002,
> > > > > > since people would need planning ahead and time for travel request approval
> > > > > > which can
> > > > > > be lengthy in some companies.
> > > > > > Yes, I agree, we wait and make suggestions to Phil.
> > > > > > Phil, where are you? Are you back yet from Barcelona?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tyky.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Paul Thorpe
> > > > > > <> To: xcbf <>
> > > > > > cc:
> > > > > > 03/29/02 10:59 AM Subject: Re: [xcbf] Initial drafts of all deliverables
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Tyky Aichelen wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Team,
> > > > > > > Happy upcoming Easter to you all!
> > > > > > > It is is quiet out there! If we want to meet our stated deadline of May
> > > > > > 30
> > > > > > > for "Initials drafts of all deliverables", we need to get going.
> > > > > > > When is our mtg #2? To speed up, we may consider to meet in persons in a
> > > > > > > one-or-two-full-day session to agree on the skeletons of those initial
> > > > > > > drafts, and nail them down in writing. Once agreed and written down, we
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > divide up the chapters writing work, assignable to each of us. This one,
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > can do it, each at our own pace and location.
> > > > > > > I can be the host for our next face-to-face mtg, if you, folks, do not
> > > > > > mind
> > > > > > > traveling to IBM site in San Jose (Northern California).
> > > > > > > Does anyone have an alternative?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OSS can also host face-to-face meetings in Somerset, NJ, but I expected
> > > > > > much of the initial work to be done via email and conference calls.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am polling to see how many of us in XCBF are interested in quartely
> > > > > > > face-to-face working sessions and can travel.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have no problem traveling when we do need face-to-face sessions. I will
> > > > > > wait for a response from Phil Griffin to indicate his proposed meeting
> > > > > > schedule in order to meet the deadlines.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Paul
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > > Tyky Aichelen
> > > > > > > OASIS XCBF TC member.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> > > > > > > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> > > > > > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> > > > > > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
> > > > >
> > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> > > > > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Prof John Larmouth
> > > > Larmouth T&PDS Ltd
> > > > (Training and Protocol Development Services)
> > > > 1 Blueberry Road
> > > > Bowdon
> > > > Cheshire WA14 3LS Tel: +44 161 928 1605
> > > > England Fax: +44 161 928 8069
> >
> > --
> > Prof John Larmouth
> > Larmouth T&PDS Ltd
> > (Training and Protocol Development Services)
> > 1 Blueberry Road
> > Bowdon
> > Cheshire WA14 3LS Tel: +44 161 928 1605
> > England Fax: +44 161 928 8069
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
--
Prof John Larmouth
Larmouth T&PDS Ltd
(Training and Protocol Development Services)
1 Blueberry Road
Bowdon
Cheshire WA14 3LS Tel: +44 161 928 1605
England Fax: +44 161 928 8069
