openc2 — archive

Subcommittee Reorganization - for/against/neither

From: David Lemire <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 14:53:00 -0000

I would say keep separation of concerns but merge the meetings. So the LS-SC and the IC-SC should meet together and have a common agenda (for an indefinite period). Right now the L-SC and IC-SC each meet once per month. I'm not sure I see any meaningful benefit to combining the meetings while retaining separate leadership, etc. Duncan stated that in another branch of this discussion that " SC meetings should be to review text and/or resolve differences on issues (ie decide between alternative versions of text and or create new hybrid text). Text should be developed by proponents offline '". At the moment, at least in the IC-SC, we're lacking in both of those areas: we aren't getting contributions of text to review and discuss and we aren't getting a critical mass of viewpoints at SC meetings to have useful discussion. I don't know the solution for increasing participation, but perhaps a very clear updated enumeration by each SC of work items (in-progress, planned, completed (?)) would be a useful first step. I haven't fully made up my mind on the reorganization proposal, but I do feel that Duncan and Michelle have presented some good points in stating their opposition. 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 On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 8:52 AM Vasileios Mavroeidis < [email protected] > wrote: I would keep the organizational structure the way it is. I don t think that re-organization will foster higher participation right now, but I do understand that having one group will allow more people to stay in the loop by aggregating them all together at this point . I would say keep separation of concerns but merge the meetings. So the LS-SC and the IC-SC should meet together and have a common agenda (for an indefinite period). -Vasileios On 24 Feb 2020, at 13:25, Brule, Joseph M < [email protected] > wrote: Willing to go along with it either way. From: duncan sfractal.com < [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2020 8:29 AM To: Brule, Joseph M < [email protected] >; OASIS OpenC2 List < [email protected] > Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Subcommittee Reorganization - for/against/neither It would be very helpful to understand what more people think about the reorganization. Please respond with where you are on the issue. Are you strongly for it, for it, strongly against it, against it, willing to go along with the majority either way, don t really care, other thoughts? My concern is my standards experience tells me that most people will keep quiet on issues like this and vote yes because they trust the leadership. In this case the leadership is divided. Being honest, I happen to be against the reorganization for the reasons I ve stated in all my other emails, slack message, etc. So the vote yes because everyone votes yes hurts my case and therefore I m trying to distinguish between the not raising objection and the actually for . It would be very useful to get more input even if you say I really don t care . 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: Friday, February 21, 2020 at 1:09 PM To: TC OpenC2 < [email protected] > Subject: [openc2] Subcommittee Reorganization All, A reorganization of the subcommittees was proposed during the January 2020 TC meeting. The purpose of this email is to present the resolution, provide background information and initiate deliberations on the topic. Once the deliberations are complete, Dave Lemire will generate an electronic ballot in accordance with the direction provided by the TC during the February TC meeting. NOTE: Review the deliberations and if you believe that I did not capture the point correctly in the summary of the deliberations then provide the correction and/or provide additional points. If there is an error, then accept that it was an honest mistake on my part. FURTHER NOTE: SLACK messages are not available to all our members. I will attempt to transfer any SLACK messages to the oasis email relay, but it is preferred if you use this email as the medium for deliberations. RESOLVED: The OpenC2 Technical Committee shall form a new subcommittee to be known as the Language and Architecture Subcommittee . Upon formation of the new subcommittee, the Language Subcommittee and the Implementation Considerations Subcommittee shall transfer their activities to the new subcommittee. Background A proposal to transfer the activities of the LSC and ICSC to a new SC was proposed during the January Monthly TC The general consensus was to revisit the issue after the Plug Fest and email deliberations Objections were raised during the February Monthly TC meeting. There was general consensus with the approach of continuing the deliberations via email and upon conclusion of the email deliberations a decision will be made via electronic ballot. After the Plug Fest, the proposed new subcommittee was brought up via email. The net effect is to combine the LSC and ICSC into a single subcommittee The AP SC will maintain its current tempo and leadership Objections to the proposal were made known via email on Feb 18, 2020. Summary of Deliberations Statement FOR Level of effort required to revise and maintain is substantially less than the initial draft The scope of the LSC and IC-SC are at a 'systems' or architectural level while the scope of the AP-SC is at a 'component' level therefore logical to combine the 'system' or 'architectural' tasks in one subcommittee and the 'component' tasks in a separate subcommittee The results of the Plug Fest seem to validate the proposal in that the vast majority of the issues identified were component level Statement AGAINST Should retain separate subcommittees to retain their focus and maintain separation of concerns Several (structured) subcommittees permit attendees to focus their attention on their areas of interest and expertise and avoid diluting the meeting. Rebuttal to the statement AGAINST No rebuttal offered Rebuttal to the statement FOR The reduced workload is more appropriately addressed by changing the cadence of the meeting rather than broaden the scope of the subcommittee. Do not agree that the current Language and IC-SC are more similar to each other, in fact [one individual] thinks that the AP-SC has more in common with the LSC than the IC-SC. Joe Brule Engineering (Y2D122) FNX-3, B4A335 410.854.4045 'Adnius ad retinedam puritem noster peciosus corporalis fluidorum ' I welcome VSRE emails. Learn more at http://vsre.info/