openc2 — archive

Re: [openc2] Potential Subcommittee Reorganization

From: Duncan Sparrell
To: [email protected]
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 13:35:00 -0000

I agree wholeheartedly with Michelle and think we should stay with the 3 SC s for now. I think Joe did the right thing in postponing this discussion for now. I think the plugfest re-energized our to-do lists. Once/if it dies down again we can, in addition to meeting less often, also go to shorter meetings. I m a big fan of agenda s. If there are no agenda items, the meeting can be cancelled or be very short. That is fine. Right now, I think all 3 SC s have work items that need work. I admit I m the hold up on some of them so I ll get to work on drafting the text I owe so we have some things to talk about. Duncan Sparrell sFractal Consulting LLC iPhone, iTypo, iApologize I welcome VSRE emails. Learn more at http://vsre.info / From: TC OpenC2 <[email protected]> on behalf of Joseph Brule <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 8:23 AM To: Michelle Barry <[email protected]>, Dave Lemire <[email protected]>, TC OpenC2 <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [openc2] Potential Subcommittee Reorganization All, I have received two objections to the notion of the new Lang and Arch SC and transfer the LSC and ICSC to the new SC. I will modify the agenda accordingly. BTW, Ms. Barry makes some very good points. Ms. Barry, In the context of the cadence of the meetings, historically we have always left that to the judgement of the co-chairs, Duncan (previously Sounil) and I were not going ot micro-manage how the subcommittee chairs execute their business. I guess that was a long winded way of saying, if you (and your co-chair s) judgement says that you need to meet more or less often, then so be it. VR Joe B From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of BARRY, MICHELLE K Sent: Monday, February 17, 2020 5:36 PM To: dave.lemire <[email protected]>; OASIS OpenC2 List <[email protected]> Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: [openc2] Potential Subcommittee Reorganization All I had my response pulled up last week but then had to step away from my computer before hitting send. Although I was originally interested in collapsing the Language and Implementation Considerations subcommittees, after further consideration and thought, I m back to supporting our current organization of separate sub-committees, each with specific and separate purposes. The focus and intent of the subcomittees remain, even though the workload and activity needed are different now, post publication of the initial OpenC2 specifications. I think the cadence and scheduling of the meetings of the subcommittees is what should change, based on the scope of work and outcomes being worked by the individual subcommittees, not the actual structure and intent of the subcommittees themselves. If the defined outcomes of any one subcommittee no longer necessitate a monthly meeting, then that subcommittee should change their meeting schedule to more appropriately support the scope of work to be completed, vs. collapse into another subcommittee. Whether the scope of work to be addressed by any one subcommittee is large or small, each subcommittee should always be structured and meetings focused on most efficient/effective use of members time and involvement to achieve the defined outcomes. The cadence of the meetings can be adjusted to ensure optimized use of participants time and (perhaps) increase attendance of interested parties. My recommendation is to change the frequency of the meetings of the language and implementation subcommittees from monthly to every-other month, or even quarterly, if necessary with work items managed via email/Slack/Git, as needed, in between scheduled meetings. I realize we may continue to have about the same number of people involved in these different areas, but keeping the objectives of the subcommittees separate helps to keep those meetings focused on a specific topic and allows our wide range of members to choose the specific areas they want to be more (or less) involved in. Best regards, Michelle Barry 813.475.4858-- [email protected] Director Cybersecurity, Security Platforms AT&T Chief Security Organization (CSO) - Tampa, FL AT&T Proprietary (Internal Use Only): Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies except under written agreement. This message and any attachments to it contain confidential business information intended solely for the recipients. If you have received this email in error, please do not forward or distribute it to anyone else, but telephone 813-475-4858 to report the error, and then delete this message from your system. From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dave Lemire Sent: Monday, February 03, 2020 10:27 AM To: OASIS OpenC2 List <[email protected]> Subject: [openc2] Potential Subcommittee Reorganization This email responds to an action item assigned to the Secretary at the 22 January 2020 TC meeting. The OpenC2 TC stood up June 2017, and established three subcommittees (SCs): OpenC2 Actuator Profile (AP) Subcommittee - Defining actuator profiles, the OpenC2 message elements applicable to specific cyber defense functions . OpenC2 Implementation Considerations (IC) Subcommittee - Providing guidance for implementation aspects such as message transport and information assurance . OpenC2 Language Subcommittee - Developing, maintaining, and resolving comments to the OpenC2 language documentation . SC portion of the TC home page: https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=openc2#subcommittees Links to the individual SC descriptions are there. A t the January 2020 TC meeting, TC co-chair Joe Brule proposed the consolidation of the Language and IC SCs, based on the projection that following the summer 2019 publication of the three initial OpenC2 specifications, the workload of those two committees would be reduced, while the workload of the AP SC would likely grow. He further proposed that the March co-chairs election be aligned with this proposed structure. In the discussion, the following points were raised: A decision on this should be delayed until after the Plug Fest / Hackathon, so that lessons learned and work items identified from that event are known and can be considered in the discussion and decision. The decision should precede the elections. A decision to restructure can be made at the February TC meeting, as the TC routinely achieves quorum, so that TC members know ahead of time what positions are being filled in March. Given the OASIS management approach of preserving all artifacts of a TC's operations, the mechanics of this change are likely to be suspending the operation of one of the existing SCs, and folding its mandates into the remaining SC (or suspending both and establishing a new, consolidated SC). T C members are invited to contribute to this discussion on-line in preparation for the 19 February TC meeting. This message will be copied to the Slack general channel. Contributions to the discussion are welcome on either email or Slack. Dave David Lemire, CISSP Systems Engineer HII Mission Driven Innovative Solutions (HII-MDIS) formerly G2, Inc. Technical Solutions Division 302 Sentinel Drive Annapolis Junction, MD 20701 Email: [email protected] Work: 301-575-5190 Mobile: 240-938-9350