[Fiware-oasc-etsi] CIM ISG ToR proposal - results from pre-consultation

[Hermann Brand]

Ok.
Br,
H

From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com]
Sent: 26 September 2016 11:25 AM
To: Elloumi, Omar (Nokia - FR) <omar.elloumi at nokia.com>; Hermann Brand <Hermann.Brand at etsi.org>; David Boswarthick <David.Boswarthick at etsi.org>; Enrico Scarrone_Internet <Enrico.Scarrone at TelecomItalia.it>
Cc: Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org; Lindsay Frost <Lindsay.Frost at neclab.eu>; Mulligan, Catherine E A <c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>; Patrick Guillemin <Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org>; Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org
Subject: Re: [Fiware-oasc-etsi] CIM ISG ToR proposal - results from pre-consultation




  Fine.  Thanks.

  Hermann (or someone from the ETSI team): could you setup a GoToMeeting bridge?

  Thanks in advance,

-- Juanjo

On 26/09/16 10:01, Elloumi, Omar (Nokia - FR) wrote:
Ok sept. 28th 14:30.
BR

De : Juanjo Hierro [mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com]
Envoyé : vendredi 23 septembre 2016 18:04
À : Hermann Brand; David Boswarthick; Enrico Scarrone_Internet; Elloumi, Omar (Nokia - FR)
Cc : Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org<mailto:Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org>; Lindsay Frost; Mulligan, Catherine E A; Patrick Guillemin; Juanjo Hierro
Objet : Re: [Fiware-oasc-etsi] CIM ISG ToR proposal - results from pre-consultation


Dear all,

  Based on results of the doodle poll, it seems like September 28th, 14:30 CET would be the best timeslot for having a confcall.

  However, I haven't seen Omar casting his preferences ...

  Could you Omar confirm whether that timeslot is ok for you, otherwise cast your preferences?

  In the event that Omar confirms, I would kindly ask ETSI to setup a GoToMeeting bridge.

  Thanks and have a good weekend,

-- Juanjo

On 21/09/16 14:37, Hermann Brand wrote:
Dear Juanjo,
Dear all,

It’s not so far any more. Let’s follow through to get it right.

Best,
Hermann



From: David Boswarthick
Sent: 21 September 2016 9:17 AM
To: Juanjo Hierro <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com><mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>; Hermann Brand <Hermann.Brand at etsi.org><mailto:Hermann.Brand at etsi.org>; Enrico Scarrone_Internet <Enrico.Scarrone at TelecomItalia.it><mailto:Enrico.Scarrone at TelecomItalia.it>; Elloumi, Omar (Nokia - FR) <omar.elloumi at nokia.com><mailto:omar.elloumi at nokia.com>
Cc: Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org<mailto:Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org>; Lindsay Frost <Lindsay.Frost at neclab.eu><mailto:Lindsay.Frost at neclab.eu>; Mulligan, Catherine E A <c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk><mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>; Patrick Guillemin <Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org><mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org>
Subject: RE: [Fiware-oasc-etsi] CIM ISG ToR proposal - results from pre-consultation

Morning Juanjo,

I can understand your frustration at the time it has taken to get the CIM work inside an ETSI ISG, but it should not come as a surprise as the topic is very close to the work ETSI is doing with oneM2M and indeed in TC smartM2M.

I recall from our initial meeting this April in Rome, Omar and myself indicated several topics that included three major items that were potentially blocking, some of which have been partially resolved since.

ETSI cannot do work that:
1) is deemed as in competition of the work in oneM2M Partnership Project  (the subject of 2nd email from Hermann and comments from Enrico/Omar)
2) infringes our IPR policy (the subject of 1st email from Hermann and subsequent exchanges with ETSI Lawyer)
3) is simply rubberstamping of external work (a topic that you have replied to earlier on in the process)

I will allow Hermann and Enrico/Omar to exchange on topic 1), and Hermann and Christian (legal) conclude on topic 2). For the 3) rubberstamping, I believe we have resolved that earlier on in the discussions.

I hope we manage to come to some sort of conclusion soon.


Kind regards

David

David Boswarthick  ● Director CSC
ETSI ● www.etsi.org<http://www.etsi.org> ● david.boswarthick at etsi.org<mailto:david.boswarthick at etsi.org>
Office: +33 (0)4 92 94 42 78 ● Mobile: +33 (0)6 74 40 83 67
This email may contain confidential information and is intended for the use of the addressee only. Any unauthorized use may be unlawful. If you receive this email by mistake, please advise the sender immediately by using the reply facility in your email software. Thank you for your co-operation.


From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com]
Sent: 21 September 2016 12:57 AM
To: Hermann Brand <Hermann.Brand at etsi.org<mailto:Hermann.Brand at etsi.org>>; Lindsay Frost <Lindsay.Frost at neclab.eu<mailto:Lindsay.Frost at neclab.eu>>; Mulligan, Catherine E A <c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk<mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>>; David Boswarthick <David.Boswarthick at etsi.org<mailto:David.Boswarthick at etsi.org>>; Patrick Guillemin <Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org<mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org>>
Cc: Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org<mailto:Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org>; Enrico Scarrone_Internet <Enrico.Scarrone at TelecomItalia.it<mailto:Enrico.Scarrone at TelecomItalia.it>>; Elloumi, Omar (Nokia - FR) <omar.elloumi at nokia.com<mailto:omar.elloumi at nokia.com>>
Subject: Re: [Fiware-oasc-etsi] CIM ISG ToR proposal - results from pre-consultation


Dear Hermann, Omar, Enrico,

  Can you share the referred detailed comments?

  I believe it is hard to agree on a face to face meeting, so please setup a doodle for a GoToMeeting (if you can provide a bridge).

  I have setup the following doodle for finding a timeslot that can be suitable for all:

http://doodle.com/poll/hfcfd4ncybxdgg4e

(Selecting a time means you agree to have a confcall that starts at that time and last two hours.  All times are CET)

  After 5 months and several meetings (I remember the one we had in Rome), all this comes as a rather big surprise to me.   Frustrating.

  Best regards,

-- Juanjo

On 20/09/16 23:44, Hermann Brand wrote:
Dear all,

We have received detailed comments from Enrico and  Omar representing ETSI SmartM2M and oneM2M. Thank you Enrico and Omar for your analysis and forward-looking proposals.

They recognize that some ambitions driving the proposed ISG CIM work are close to those in smartM2M (SAREF) and also in oneM2M Rel-2, but attempt to envisage a win-win-win-win scenario for ISG CIM, SmartM2M, oneM2M and indeed the European Commission. Their proposal could be taken into consideration by making some modifications in the scope section of the ISG CIM proposal.

We do believe that it is important to share the views first, to see whether these ideas are acceptable from the FIWARE point of view. It would then be quite straight forward to reword some parts of the scope section.

An email discussion is not the best tool to serve this purpose and we believe that a meeting would be needed.

Would you be available for a meeting, ideally face-to-face, at least by conference call/ goToMeeting?

If so would you please indicate who would be involved and their availabilities?

Best regards,
Hermann
PS: Should be a separate meeting/call. Can’t all be dealt with on Thursday, 10h CEST



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-oasc-etsi/attachments/20160926/41b573f4/attachment.html>