Hannes,Let me as a member of ISOC BoT that is appointed by the IETF explain a bit more on what Lucy just explained below. I hope first of all that you specifically noted that ISOC is looking for coordination with many groups. This implies that when you or anyone else see some formal connection between ISOC and other organisations does not imply ISOC can get arrangements with other organisations as well. And, different organisations require different kinds of "connections".
Regarding the work between IETF and ISOC in for example the work on trust, that *is* done together with the IETF. We do not have any formal explicit relationship with the various wg's (but the IETF as you know does not work that way...), but we do of course have connection with various very active IETF participants in the various areas. You can for example have a look at the report that was published in 2008 regarding specifically this work:
http://www.isoc.org/isoc/mission/initiative/docs/trust-report-2008.pdf
Attendees ISOC Board of Trustees/Officers:Fred Baker, Scott Bradner (remote), Hiroshi Esaki, Patrik Fältström, Ted Hardie, Daniel Karrenberg, Franck Martin, Desirée Miloshevic, Alejandro Pisanty (remote), Glenn Ricart, Stephen Squires (past BoT member and instigator), Lynn St. Amour, Bill St. Arnaud, Patrick Vande Walle ISOC Staff: Leslie Daigle (remote), Frederic Donck, Lucy Lynch, Karen RoseInternet Technical Community Representatives:Russ Housley (Internet Engineering Task Force chair), Olaf Kolkmann (Internet Architecture Board chair), Danny McPherson (Internet Architecture Board)Subject Experts:Levi Gundert (Team Cymru), Dick Hardt (Sxip Identity), RL “Bob” Morgan (Internet 2, University of Washington), Mikko Särelä (Nomadic- Lab)
Work has continued after this workshop as Lucy explain, and many individuals are involved in identity work in the IETF (including Kerberos work) have been and are involved. They for example include Leif Johansson that is a long time IETF participant. The whole goal with this project is to coordinate, and explain "what's up".
But, I also see that you seem to be interested in helping, and I thank you for that. ;-)
Patrik On 1 mar 2009, at 18.59, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
As you might have noticed, the WebSSO Identity Management space is notrunning out of organizations and groups. Someone could, for example, come up with the question why ISOC did not join the MIT Kerberos Consortium (see http://www.kerberos.org/), as Kerberos is a technology developed within the IETF, or to support technologies like OpenID, OAuth, etc. that are closer tothe Internet deployment. I am sure your team had a lot of conversations with the IAB on whatdirection would be better for the Internet (with respect to the creation of an identity layer) but I fear that many in the IETF community are at bestnot informed about what you are doing and why you believe that this is heading into the right direction.If ISOC wants to understand what "managed identity" will mean for end usersthen maybe a discussion within the IETF would help to get a betterunderstanding as some of us have been working on this subject for a while.One could even claim that the IETF is also a pretty open forum to discuss these types of things, particularly when they have a high relevance for the Internet. Did nobody come up with the idea about how the IETF could be moreactively involved in this space? Ciao Hannes-----Original Message----- From: Lucy Lynch [mailto:llynch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: 01 March, 2009 19:30 To: Hannes Tschofenig Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Internet Society joins Liberty Alliance Management Board: Why? On Sat, 28 Feb 2009, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:I would like to hear a bit more background about theseactivities, seehttps://www.projectliberty.org/news_events/press_releases/ internet_society_j oins_liberty_alliance_management_boardHannes - <ISOC hat on> As stated in the press release, ISOC has joined the the Liberty Alliance Board. Our participation here is directly related to the ISOC initiative on Trust and Identity (T/Id). Our primary interest is not just the Liberty Alliance itself but a proposed transition to a broader organization. This effort is currently called either IDTBD or NewOrg in the community discussions. The intent is to open participation to new entrants and technologies and NewOrg will also help represent emerging identity management work to end-users, policymakers, enterprise adopters, and others. ISOC has been actively reaching out to many of the current identity technology communities as part of our effort to understand what "managed identity" will mean for end users. We also have some interest in how the frameworks and use cases developing in user managed identity communities may overlap and inform more traditional networked identity/identifier problems. I believe that ISOC support for this move to an open community lead forum will help bring this important work to a broader audience and will encourage greater participation and interoperability (high priorities for T/Id work: http://www.isoc.org/isoc/mission/initiative/trust.shtml). The transition to a "NewOrg" is still in process, and the founding documents: by-laws, operating procedures, IPR considerations, etc., were reviewed at the recent Liberty Alliance Plenary and continue to progress. (see: http://groups.google.com/group/idtbd) - LucyThanks! Ciao Hannes _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Attachment:
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf