[Idel-wg] [voms-proc-wg] OGF37 Arrangements and sessions

[Jens Jensen]

Hi Yoshio,

I think there are others who have similar constraints.

Cheers
--jens

On 31/01/2013 08:59, Yoshio Tanaka wrote:
> Hi Mike, Jens, and all,
>
> I'm planning to go to OGF37, but I need to leave there on Wednesday
> (13th).  So, if we have CAOPs session(s), I would expect that it will
> be on Monday or Tuesday.
>
> --
> Yoshio Tanaka (yoshio.tanaka at aist.go.jp)
>
> From: Jens Jensen <jens.jensen at stfc.ac.uk>
> Subject: Re: [voms-proc-wg] [Idel-wg] OGF37 Arrangements and sessions
> Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 15:01:19 +0000
> Message-ID: <50FC06BF.9030700 at stfc.ac.uk>
>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> There is more afoot for OGF37; Andrew Grimshaw is planning to organise
>> a specific workshop on (identity) delegation. He was going to write
>> some paragraphs and send them around - probably around now.  It would
>> make sense to combine IDEL-WG with this activity (ie to host it as an
>> extended IDEL-WG) - if you agree.
>>
>> 1. I haven't looked into the timing/flights/costs/logistics yet, so I
>> don't know.
>> 2. A day would seem reasonable (four sessions)?
>> 3. Don't know; will leave to the chairs to decide. There is useful
>> stuff to do, though, we have enough material for at least one session
>> - a draft IGTF profile for SARoNGS et al (aka "LIVE"), updates from
>> PMAs,
>> 3. As regards FEDSEC I suspect there is more than enough useful new
>> stuff floating around, but it'll depend on who is coming and to some
>> extent how many documents I have time to put into a useful form before
>> March...
>>
>> Cheers
>> -j
>>
>> On 18/01/2013 17:01, Mike Jones wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> It's time to register sessions of OGF37.
>>>
>>> There's noise from IDEL participants and we should schedule that this
>>> group
>>> meets.  And I should be in a position to circulate a strawman on the
>>> gridsite
>>> delegation info doc real soon^(TM).
>>>
>>> CA-ops mentioned that OGF37 was scheduled close to another similar
>>> meeting and
>>> folk might not be able to make it; I believe we should at least meet
>>> for one
>>> session to keep things ticking forward, but am happy to apply for more
>>> than 1
>>> session if we thing there are items to discuss.  If we will not be
>>> quorate
>>> then perhaps we should not have CA-ops
>>>
>>> VOMS proc has a straw-man doc that we need to work on so we need to
>>> schedule
>>> this session.
>>>
>>> Questions then:
>>>
>>> 1, Who will make it to OGF37
>>> 2, do we need 3 or 4 sessions to cover work (assuming CA-OPS)?
>>> 3, do we suspend CA-ops this time due to participation?
>>> also,
>>> 3, Jens Are you going, and is there a FedSec session?
>>>
>>> Rgds,
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Idel-wg mailing list
>>> Idel-wg at ogf.org
>>> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/idel-wg
>>
>> -- 
>> Scanned by iCritical.

-- 
Scanned by iCritical.