OASIS Emergency Management TC

 View Only

Re: [emergency] Re: [sia-pilot6] [emergency] EDXL-DE routing andvalueListUrn

  • 1.  Re: [emergency] Re: [sia-pilot6] [emergency] EDXL-DE routing andvalueListUrn

    Posted 03-21-2006 18:46
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    emergency message

    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


    Subject: Re: [emergency] Re: [sia-pilot6] [emergency] EDXL-DE routing andvalueListUrn


    Yup.
    
    At 10:14 AM -0700 3/21/06, Carl Reed OGC Account wrote:
    >What he said . . .
    >
    >And this also gets to the issue we discussed in the IF SC call 
    >today. There is considerable misunderstanding and need for education 
    >in the market place regarding the use and implementation of EDXL. 
    >Part of this education is that EDXL is a transport mechanism and 
    >must/can be viewed as independent from the technology implementation 
    >infrastructure. It should not matter if the enterprise (in the 
    >virtual sense) is implementing against a middleware bus, using 
    >SOAP/WSDL/UDDI, using ebRIM/XML, using an OGC Catalog, using the 
    >COMCARE EPAD application, using Java enterprise beans, etc. I view 
    >EDXL as technology implementation neutral - as it should be.
    >
    >Am I wrong in thinking this?
    >
    >Also, my previous email was more about making sure that the 
    >discussions in the EM TC on EDXL do not totally go totally US 
    >DHS/DoD centric. I understand the immediate requirement but we 
    >cannot loose sight of the bigger picture. For example, I would love 
    >to be able to recommend EDXL to ORCHESTRA in Europe.
    >
    >Cheers
    >
    >Carl
    >
    >----- Original Message ----- From: "Rex Brooks" <rexb@starbourne.com>
    >To: "SIA Pilot-6" <sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net>; "Carl Reed OGC 
    >Account" <creed@opengeospatial.org>; <emergency@lists.oasis-open.org>
    >Cc: "Haleftiras, Pericles" <phaleftiras@systechnologies.com>; 
    >"Glaser, Ronald" <rfglase@sandia.gov>
    >Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 5:33 PM
    >Subject: [emergency] Re: [sia-pilot6] [emergency] EDXL-DE routing 
    >and valueListUrn
    >
    >>I don't think Carl misunderstood that different valueListUrns are 
    >>possible. Of course, I could be wrong, but I doubt it. I think 
    >>Carl's concern is that some people may think that Dave's proposal 
    >>was for a single valueListUrn. I do not think Dave is doing that. I 
    >>think Dave is responding to the call for various groups to start 
    >>producing, publishing and maintaining these necessary valueListUrns 
    >>so that we can start using them in EDXL_DE routed messages.
    >>
    >>All of the international groups and constituencies mentioned need 
    >>to be informed that it is now incumbent upon them to provide these 
    >>semantic resources so that their systems, be they SensorNets or 
    >>weatherAlerts, can be properly connected through our Emergency 
    >>Response Networks.
    >>
    >>Ciao,
    >>Rex
    >>
    >>At 5:00 PM -0700 3/20/06, Ellis, David wrote:
    >>>Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
    >>>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
    >>>boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C64C7A.707355BB"
    >>>
    >>>Carl
    >>>
    >>>All of scenarios you have proposed could use seperate valueListUrn 
    >>>to control distribution of data within defined Area of 
    >>>Responsiblities.  If transfer of data is needed between these 
    >>>AORs, methods for exchanging messages are avaiable.  When can we 
    >>>talk about this.  I believe all of your domain issues are 
    >>>potential misunderstandings how routing is accomplished.
    >>>David E. Ellis
    >>>Information Management Architect
    >>>(505) 844-6697
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>From: Carl Reed OGC Account [mailto:creed@opengeospatial.org]
    >>>Sent: Mon 3/20/2006 4:20 PM
    >>>To: Ellis, David; SIA Pilot-6; emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
    >>>Cc: Harry Haury; Haleftiras, Pericles; Glaser, Ronald
    >>>Subject: Re: [emergency] EDXL-DE routing and valueListUrn
    >>>
    >>>David -
    >>>
    >>>While I understand the urgency and while I do not necessarily disagree with
    >>>the contents of your slides on a National Effort for Emergency Data
    >>>Distribution, I would like to add a few words of caution.
    >>>
    >>>First, what you have outlined are uses cases and requirements for one domain
    >>>of use - alerts as related to secure US DoD sensor nets. I deal with folks
    >>>doing sensor systems and networks in a number of other countries - all
    >>>civilian. Any of these applications using sensors can create alerts. For
    >>>example, a new water portal in Canada that will send alerts based on stream
    >>>flow gauges, traffic alerts being generated by the new generation of ITS
    >>>capabilities, weather alerts, and systems function alerts being generated by
    >>>transducers, and so forth. We cannot loose sight of all the other potential
    >>>use cases that drives the requirements for EDXL - now and in the future.
    >>>
    >>>Second, and related to the first, is the fact that OASIS is an international
    >>>standards organization. As such, we cannot ignore requirements for using
    >>>EDXL that may be extremely viable in other countries. It is unfortunate that
    >>>we have had little input from organizations in other countries that have
    >>>requirements similar to the US DoD. That is why I am very pleased with the
    >>>progress of the Sensor Standards Harmonization work that NIST is
    >>>spearheading.
    >>>
    >>>Third, we would be remiss in ignoring the potential for alerts coming from
    >>>the emerging sensor nets being designed, built, and fairly recently deployed
    >>>for home systems and office buildings (office sensor networks are much more
    >>>mature). See 
    >>><http://www.usipv6.com/CES_Presentations/CES_Itaru_Mimura.pdf>http://www.usipv6.com/CES_Presentations/CES_Itaru_Mimura.pdf 
    >>>as
    >>>well as all the work being done at UCLA (SOS) and Sun (SUN SPOT). These
    >>>systems are envisioned as being able to automatically generate alerts (fire,
    >>>carbon monoxide, health, etc).
    >>>
    >>>Finally, and anyone (someone) correct me if I am wrong, but perhaps the
    >>>COMCARE EPAD system would be a repository/registry solution.
    >>>
    >>>So, I agree that current DHS and DoD requirements are very valid and those
    >>>requirements must be answered by EDXL. But let's make sure we remain
    >>>balanced in our approach so that other communities outside DoD and DHS are
    >>>also fairly represented at that CAP and EDXL have used well beyond.
    >>>
    >>>Cheers
    >>>
    >>>Carl
    >>>
    >>>----- Original Message -----
    >>>From: "Ellis, David" <dellis@sandia.gov>
    >>>To: "SIA Pilot-6" <sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net>;
    >>><emergency@lists.oasis-open.org>
    >>>Cc: "Harry Haury" <hhaury@nuparadigm.com>; "Haleftiras, Pericles"
    >>><phaleftiras@systechnologies.com>; "Glaser, Ronald" <rfglase@sandia.gov>
    >>>Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 10:11 AM
    >>>Subject: [emergency] EDXL-DE routing and valueListUrn
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>ALL
    >>>
    >>>I have a reasonably mature strategy for creating valueListUrn lists and
    >>>how they can be used to deploy a national architecture for Alerting and
    >>>Warning.  I have been trying to develop this to support Chips Disaster
    >>>Management efforts (e.g. EDXL-RM) and to allow for national sensor
    >>>capabilities (e.g. DNDO) to have the EDXL-DE routing system (execution
    >>>context) which provides the following capabilities:
    >>>
    >>>1. Allow for establishment of Communities of Interest (COIs) where
    >>>appropriate authority can establish roles of entities, information
    >>>routing rules between them and issue certificate to ensure
    >>>authentication and authorization.
    >>>2. Permit interaction between COIs to instantiate robust MOUs enforced
    >>>by execution context allowing creation of national information grid.
    >>>3. Permit secure delivery of multiple levels of sensitive information
    >>>via signing, encryption and labeling within the EDXL-DE.
    >>>4. Allow abstraction of the implementation details (what) so national
    >>>planners can implement various operational concepts (documented in
    >>>DoDAF, FEA etc.) with minimal confusion on "how" it is accomplished.
    >>>
    >>>I have tried to engage NIEM for over one year to explain these concepts
    >>>without success.  There is finally understanding between the various
    >>>standards organization on how important this is to major government
    >>>implementations.  On the other hand, major information providers are
    >>>claim our capabilities either don't exist or have never been
    >>>demonstrated.  Both are not true and in fact the EDXL-DE is being used
    >>>in an operational system within the DoD.  Unfortunately, it is not
    >>>branded as EDXL-DE since we have not issued the EDXL-DE OASIS standard
    >>>yet.
    >>>
    >>>I need as many of the organization implementing EDXL-DE to attempt
    >>>sending outputs from your applications to the developing EDXL-DE routing
    >>>capability at NuParadigm in Saint Louis or our capability at Sandia
    >>>National Laboratories.  Also, a generic ability to wrap CAP messages in
    >>>EDXL has been created and we need to discuss the security implications
    >>>of doing this from local applications or by the "execution context" for
    >>>legacy/warning-only CAP applications.
    >>>
    >>>I need to be able to list all the capabilities of your applications even
    >>>if they use explicated routing (e.g. DMIS COGs) and have no security
    >>>capability.  The design of our governments emerging national
    >>>capabilities is moving at lighting speed and EDXL-DE capabilities needs
    >>>to be a substantial portion of it.  Attached are two briefings present
    >>>this past week on sensor routing.
    >>>
    >>>David E. Ellis
    >>>Information Management Architect
    >>>(505) 844-6697
    >>>
    >>>-----Original Message-----
    >>>From: sia-pilot6-bounces@humanml.cim3.net
    >>>[<mailto:sia-pilot6-bounces@humanml.cim3.net>mailto:sia-pilot6-bounces@humanml.cim3.net] 
    >>>On Behalf Of Elysa Jones
    >>>Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 11:23 AM
    >>>To: Rex Brooks
    >>>Cc: sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net
    >>>Subject: Re: [sia-pilot6] [emergency] EDXL-DE Committee Draft
    >>>
    >>>Yes, that is a good point.  I too want us to start coming up with these
    >>>"managed lists" knowing full well that NIEM wont be providing us
    >>>anything
    >>>in the near term.  I had thought too that we could use the event list,
    >>>incident type, etc. that were provided in the original draft hand off as
    >>>a
    >>>starting place.  Maybe we should put these in examples and put them in
    >>>the
    >>>cookbook?  I too think the Govt agencies will not step up to this for
    >>>some
    >>>time and I am glad the registry is being developed in the pilot.  We do
    >>>need another company though that can sign up for the "use" for the
    >>>committee specification phase.  I seem to be focused most these days on
    >>>jumping through the hoops for ratification.  Regards, Elysa
    >>>
    >>>At 10:07 AM 2/25/2006, Rex Brooks wrote:
    >>>>Just to clarify, it isn't DMIS or IEM that needs to have a keyword/list
    >>>in
    >>>>place, but they do need to be using some values in those fields that
    >>>can
    >>>>be recognized and used by all of us, or by others that need and have
    >>>>permissions to do so. We didn't address that level of permissions, and
    >>>I
    >>>>doubt that anyone will start restricting these initial efforts, but it
    >>>IS
    >>>>another place where security measures can be imposed if appropriate,
    >>>and
    >>>>since our pilot is building a registry where these pointers or the
    >>>actual
    >>>>resources can reside, I wanted to mention it.  While I want to be fair
    >>>to
    >>>>gov agencies, I suspect they will have a more difficult time getting
    >>>the
    >>>>funding resources, considering the Congress' recent actions with regard
    >>>to
    >>>>"any" already approved E-Gov program movement of monies preparatory to
    >>>>actual spending, the chances are good that what the organizations in
    >>>this
    >>>>TC actually produce will be the default system for quite some time to
    >>>>come, so I want to suggest to everyone that they bear that in mind and
    >>>>approach work going forward in the next six months or so as if this
    >>>will
    >>>>be all the system there will be for the next year. Once what we build
    >>>>shows that it works, then I suspect there will quickly be a wealth of
    >>>>resources available.
    >>>>
    >>>>Regards,
    >>>>Rex
    >>>>
    >>>>At 4:12 AM -0600 2/25/06, Elysa Jones wrote:
    >>>>>Hey Rex, Welcome back.  I hope your trip went well.  As for the 3
    >>>"users"
    >>>>>of the EDXL-DE, I think Sandia, IEM and DMIS volunteered to make the
    >>>>>statement about "use."  We wont be able to use Sandia though since
    >>>Dave
    >>>>>has an individual membership.  I'll put a note out to the list shortly
    >>>to
    >>>>>ask who will be our third and if there is any keywords they must have
    >>>in
    >>>>>place.  Elysa
    >>>>>
    >>>>>At 10:15 PM 2/24/2006, Rex Brooks wrote:
    >>>>>>Yes, this is all true,
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>However, we still need 3 member organizations to vouch that they
    >>>"use"
    >>>>>>it as part of the move to an OASIS-wide vote, so we need to be
    >>>implmenting it.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Regards,
    >>>>>>Rex
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>P.S. This means that we need to get an EventType Keyword/List and
    >>>>>>Sender/Recipient Keybord/List, etc, published by the appropriate
    >>>groups.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Hey Tim,
    >>>>>>>Yes, the next TC call is 3/9.  Whether we pull it now and make a
    >>>change
    >>>>>>>or wait until another round we could still not get it to a final
    >>>OASIS
    >>>>>>>vote until May given the calendar process requirements. The
    >>>Committee
    >>>>>>>Draft has to be to OASIS for 5 business days before going to 15 day
    >>>>>>>review and must be back from 15 day review, comments addressed,
    >>>voted
    >>>>>>>Committee Specification and back to OASIS by the 15th of the month
    >>>>>>>prior to the ratification vote.  We are on a tight schedule for a
    >>>vote
    >>>>>>>the last 2 weeks of April even if we receive no substantive
    >>>comments.
    >>>>>>>Thanks for your input,
    >>>>>>>Elysa
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>At 12:31 PM 2/22/2006, Tim Grapes wrote:
    >>>>>>>>All,
    >>>>>>>>Do I correctly recall that our next TC meeting won't be conducted
    >>>until
    >>>>>>>>March 9?  If so, I recommend we lay out our cards now in case
    >>>anyone feels
    >>>>>>>>the option to pull back and re-publish is warranted.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>My input is that this is simply a typo that can be corrected after
    >>>this
    >>>>>>>>15-day review.   However, if others feel the error truly is
    >>>substantive, I
    >>>>>>>>feel we should pull it back, make the correction, and republish
    >>>ASAP
    >>>>>>>>rather
    >>>>>>>>than incurring an additional 15-day public comment.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Regards,
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Tim Grapes
    >>>>>>>>Evolution Technologies, Inc.
    >>>>>>>>Disaster Management egov Initiative
    >>>>>>>>Science and Technology Directorate/OIC
    >>>>>>>>Department of Homeland Security
    >>>>>>>>Office:  (703) 654-6075
    >>>>>>>>Mobile:  (703) 304-4829
    >>>>>>>>tgrapes@evotecinc.com
    >>>>>>>>tim.grapes@associates.dhs.gov
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
    >>>>>>>>From: Elysa Jones 
    >>>>>>>>[<mailto:ejones@warningsystems.com>mailto:ejones@warningsystems.com]
    >>>>>>>>Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 1:06 PM
    >>>>>>>>To: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
    >>>>>>>>Subject: [emergency] EDXL-DE Committee Draft
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>TC Members,
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>As discussed on our call yesterday, there are a couple of issues
    >>>with the
    >>>>>>>>EDXL-DE that have been brought to light from within the TC.  We are
    >>>not
    >>>>>>>>able to make any changes to the posted documents until after the 15
    >>>day
    >>>>>>>>review.  That review is schedule to end March 4.  The only comments
    >>>so far
    >>>>>>>>have come from within the TC although I fully expect some comments
    >>>as the
    >>>>>>>>end draws near.  The most significant comment is the problem with
    >>>the
    >>>>>>>>schema not matching the DOM.  The DOM is correct and the place most
    >>>folks
    >>>>>>>>look for understanding of what is presented.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>I have discussed our situation with Mary McRae, our OASIS staff
    >>>contact to
    >>>>>>>>determine our most efficient method to proceed.  She said that if
    >>>in the
    >>>>>>>>mind of the TC, the schema would be considered non-normative, it
    >>>could be
    >>>>>>>>changed as any other typo or correction that is non-substantive
    >>>after the
    >>>>>>>>15-day review is complete.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>If we do feel that the correction of the schema is substantive,
    >>>another
    >>>>>>>>15-day comment period would be required.  In that case, we could
    >>>pull the
    >>>>>>>>current 15-day review, make the change and re-publish.  Or we could
    >>>wait
    >>>>>>>>until this period is over, make our corrections and re-post for
    >>>another
    >>>>>>>>15-day review.  In either case, the document has to go to OASIS by
    >>>the
    >>>>>>>>15th
    >>>>>>>>of the month prior to the month of the vote.  With a successful
    >>>15-day
    >>>>>>>>review in this round, we will be able to submit to OASIS by the
    >>>15th of
    >>>>>>>>March and thus an OASIS wide vote the last 2 weeks of April.  A
    >>>second
    >>>>>>>>15-day review no matter how it happens will postpone the OASIS wide
    >>>vote
    >>>>>>>>until the last 2 weeks of May.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>That is where we stand now and there is no real need for a decision
    >>>at
    >>>>>>>>this
    >>>>>>>>point.  Please consider whether you feel the incorrect schema is
    >>>>>>>>substantive or not and let me know the will of the TC as to how we
    >>>>>>>>proceed.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Regards,
    >>>>>>>>Elysa Jones
    >>>>>>>>Chair, OASIS EM-TC
    >>>>>>>>Engineering PRogram Manager
    >>>>>>>>Warning Systems, Inc.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>>--
    >>>>>>>>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC
    >>>that
    >>>>>>>>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs
    >>>in
    >>>>>>>>OASIS
    >>>>>>>>at:
    >>>>>>>><https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups..
    >>>php
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>--
    >>>>>>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
    >>>>>>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
    >>>>>>>>Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/266 - Release Date:
    >>>2/21/2006
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>--
    >>>>>>>>No virus found in this outgoing message.
    >>>>>>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
    >>>>>>>>Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/266 - Release Date:
    >>>2/21/2006
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>>-
    >>>>>>>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
    >>>>>>>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs
    >>>in
    >>>>>>>OASIS
    >>>>>>>at:
    >>>>>>><https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.p>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.p
    >>>hp
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>--
    >>>>>>Rex Brooks
    >>>>>>President, CEO
    >>>>>>Starbourne Communications Design
    >>>>>>GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
    >>>>>>Berkeley, CA 94702
    >>>>>>Tel: 510-849-2309
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>--
    >>>>Rex Brooks
    >>>>President, CEO
    >>>>Starbourne Communications Design
    >>>>GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
    >>>>Berkeley, CA 94702
    >>>>Tel: 510-849-2309
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>  _________________________________________________________________
    >>>Message Archives: 
    >>><http://humanml.cim3.net/forum/sia-pilot6/>http://humanml.cim3.net/forum/sia-pilot6/
    >>>To Post: 
    >>><mailto:sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net>mailto:sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net
    >>>Shared Files: 
    >>><http://humanml.cim3.net/file/work/project/sia-pilot6/>http://humanml.cim3.net/file/work/project/sia-pilot6/
    >>>CWE Portal: <http://humanml.cim3.net/>http://humanml.cim3.net/
    >>>Community Wiki: <http://humanml.cim3.net/wiki/>http://humanml.cim3.net/wiki/
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>>
    >>>>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>>  > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
    >>>>  generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
    >>>>  OASIS
    >>>>  at:
    >>>><https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups..php
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
    >>>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
    >>>at:
    >>><https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups..php
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>  _________________________________________________________________
    >>>Message Archives: http://humanml.cim3.net/forum/sia-pilot6/
    >>>To Post: mailto:sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net
    >>>Shared Files: http://humanml.cim3.net/file/work/project/sia-pilot6/
    >>>CWE Portal: http://humanml.cim3.net/
    >>>Community Wiki: http://humanml.cim3.net/wiki/
    >>
    >>
    >>--
    >>Rex Brooks
    >>President, CEO
    >>Starbourne Communications Design
    >>GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
    >>Berkeley, CA 94702
    >>Tel: 510-849-2309
    >>
    >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
    >>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
    >>at:
    >>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
    >
    >
    >---------------------------------------------------------------------
    >To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
    >generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
    >at:
    >https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
    
    
    -- 
    Rex Brooks
    President, CEO
    Starbourne Communications Design
    GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
    Berkeley, CA 94702
    Tel: 510-849-2309
    


    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]