|
Greg Newby: 05/06/2007 4:46 AM EDT
|
|
Action: |
Update
resolution changed from PUBLISHED to none (no value)
|
|
Greg Newby: 06/25/2006 9:03 PM EDT
|
|
Action: |
Update
Closed set to 06/25/2006
resolution set to PUBLISHED
Status changed from Open to Closed
|
|
Greg Newby: 03/27/2006 2:11 PM EST
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_group changed from Security to <None>
artifact_status changed from Closed to Open
Category changed from Experimental to <None>
group_artifact_id changed from Submit GGF Draft to Published
Priority changed from 5 to -
|
|
Joel Replogle: 03/27/2006 11:06 AM EST
|
|
Comment: |
Published as GFD.66 on 27 March, 2006
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Joel Replogle: 03/27/2006 11:06 AM EST
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_status changed from ready to publish to Closed
assigned_to changed from 9357 to 100
close_date changed from - to 2006-03-27 11:06:27
Priority changed from 1 to 5
|
|
Greg Newby: 03/26/2006 10:44 PM EST
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_status changed from Final Editor Review to ready to publish
assigned_to changed from 302 to 9357
|
|
Greg Newby: 03/26/2006 10:43 PM EST
|
|
Comment: |
Thanks for the efforts of the contributors to this
document.
It will be published as GFD-E.066.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 03/26/2006 10:43 PM EST
|
|
Attachment: |
gfd-e.066.doc
(185 KB)
|
|
Action: |
Update
File added set to 816: gfd-e.066.doc
|
|
Greg Newby: 01/24/2006 11:41 AM EST
|
|
Action: |
Update
Priority changed from 2 to 1
|
|
Greg Newby: 01/13/2006 3:52 PM EST
|
|
Comment: |
Ok. I'll give this a final review, then move
to the next phase.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 01/13/2006 3:52 PM EST
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_status changed from AD Review to Final Editor Review
assigned_to changed from 477 to 302
|
|
Olle Mulmo: 01/13/2006 3:10 PM EST
|
|
Comment: |
This document captures use of technology can be labelled "historical". While it didn't get through publication in a timely manner for several reasons,
it has been exposed to implementation experiecen and updated to capture feedback from those efforts: It is my opionion that the document is
technically in a very good state.
Given the good technical content and the slight historical status, I do not find a lack of public comments a major concern. After discussions with the
authors and the WG, we therefore propose to move this document onwards in the publication process but to publish it as an Experimental document.
/Olle
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Olle Mulmo: 01/13/2006 3:10 PM EST
|
|
Action: |
Update
Category changed from Recommendations Track to Experimental
|
|
Greg Newby: 01/09/2006 5:28 PM EST
|
|
Comment: |
There were zero comments in the public comment tracker:
https://forge.gridforum.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=576
I'm re-assigning this to one of the cognizant area directors,
to plan the next phase. Typically, we would start another
60-day public comment, but maybe there are reasons to just
go ahead and accept this document as-is.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 01/09/2006 5:28 PM EST
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_status changed from Public Comment Period to AD Review
assigned_to changed from 9357 to 477
Priority changed from 3 to 2
|
|
Greg Newby: 10/18/2005 10:10 AM EST
|
|
Comment: |
This document is now in 60-day public comment,
and will be due 60 days after it is publicly announced.
The GFSG noted that OGSI is a "legacy" base for
the recommendation, compared to WS-. In the future,
we anticipate a follow-on or replacement document.
One related suggestion is to consider changing the title of
the document.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 10/18/2005 10:10 AM EST
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_status changed from GFSG Review to Public Comment Period
assigned_to changed from 477 to 9357
Priority changed from 4 to 3
|
|
Von Welch: 10/06/2005 9:28 AM EST
|
|
Comment: |
To respond to Dave Snelling's remark, yes the plan is to update this document to WSRF. However there were multiple implementors (Globus and PERMIS)
who implemented this OGSI-based specification and it was used in deployment (UK BRIDGES project). Hence from our perspective it seems worth capturing.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
David Snelling: 09/27/2005 9:25 AM EST
|
|
Comment: |
I thought this had been sent back to be updated. As much as I love OGSI, I don't think anyone is planning to implement it. This spec is based on OGSI
and therefore is only of historical interrest in its cuttern form. I see two options:
1) Send it back for an update (during which time they could convert it to a profile as recommended last time around).
2) Allow it forward for PC, but possibly as an informational or experimental document to reflect its historical status.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 09/25/2005 4:25 PM EST
|
|
Comment: |
This document is now in 15-day GFSG review,
prior to public comment. Because of the intervening
GGF15 conference, responses from GFSG will be
due one week later: October 18.
Note, I uploaded a copy of this document with
all changes accepted, for the GSFG review.
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 09/25/2005 4:25 PM EST
|
|
Attachment: |
draft-ogsi-authz-saml-sep25-05.doc
(213.5 KB)
|
|
Action: |
Update
File added set to 684: draft-ogsi-authz-saml-sep25-05.doc
artifact_status changed from Initial Editor Review to GFSG Review
assigned_to changed from 302 to 477
Priority changed from 5 to 4
|
|
Greg Newby: 09/13/2005 6:41 PM EST
|
|
Comment: |
Dear Author or Draft Editor-
Thank you for submitting your draft to the GGF Editor! In most cases the draft
will be assigned to an Area Director for review as the first step in the document
publication process.
The URL provided with this note allows you to track your submission and to
communicate with the GGF Editor or Area Director(s) who are reviewing the
draft. At the very bottom of the tracker display (web page) a detailed log of all
actions related to this submission is available.
You may also wish to alert your colleagues that the draft has been submitted, and from their GridForge accounts they may wish to monitor this item in
order to receive email any time action is taken regarding this submission.
Informational and Experimental drafts are reviewed by the GGF Editor and one
or more Area Directors. The GGF Editor will determine whether the draft is
ready for public comment, or if there are items for the author(s) to address
prior to public comment. This initial review generally takes no more than two
weeks.
Community Practice and Recommendations Track drafts require a GFSG review
prior to public comment. This can add 2-3 weeks to the initial GGF Editor
review depending on current workload of the GFSG.
Please do not hesitate to inquire about the status of your submission at any time by way of comments added to this tracker item, which will be
automatically emailed to the individual who appears in the "assigned to" field.
Thanks very much-
GGF Editor
|
|
Action: |
Update
|
|
Greg Newby: 09/13/2005 6:41 PM EST
|
|
Action: |
Update
artifact_status changed from Open to Initial Editor Review
Priority changed from - to 5
|
|
Von Welch: 09/13/2005 10:13 AM EST
|
|
Action: |
Create
|
|
|