Concrete Implementation Agenda & Notes from 06012010 Meeting

From Direct Project
Jump to: navigation, search

Notes from the Concrete Implementation Workgroup


Date: June 1, 2010
Time: 12pm-1pm

Attendees: Jackie Key, Steven Waldren, Ravi Madduri, Wesley Combs, David Kibbe, Nageshwara Bashyam, Karen Witting, Matt Koehler, Sean Nolan, Dan Kazzaz, Chris Lomonico, Lidia Starry, Nourich Saraf, Brett Peterson, Grahm Evans, Brian Hoffman, Brian Behlendorf, Arien Malec, Don Jorgensen, Chris Moyer, Travis Grigsby, Andy Heeren, John Moehrke, Vassil Peytchev

Actions for this Week:

#
Date
Action
Status
Owner
Due Date
26
6/1/10
Add optional S&T risk analysis section to capability worksheet
Open
Sean Nolan
6/2/10
27
6/1/10
Provide HITSC reviewers with draft capability worksheets and pointers to relevant specifications/documents
Open
Arien
6/2/10
28
6/1/10
Schedule hour-long review meetings for the HITSC review team on June 7th and 9th
Open
Arien
6/4/10


Actions from last Week:

#
Date
Action
Status
Owner
Due Date
21
5/25/10
Update Capability Worksheet to remove two sections: 11.3.1 and 9.4
Closed
Sean
6/1/10
22
5/25/10
Continue discussion of Capability Worksheet on the wiki and post any major objections
Open
WG
6/1/10
23
5/25/10
Create a wiki page describing the Argonne National Laboratory’s REST implementation and speak to the security framework for this implementation
Open
Ravi Madduri
6/1/10
24
5/25/10
Request trusted HIT experts to become involved in an external review of the concrete implementations
Open
WG
6/1/10
25
5/25/10
Distribute invitation for extended WG meeting on June 8th
Open
Jackie Key
6/1/10


Agenda:

Short meeting, maybe!

  • Discuss Threat Model suggestion from S&T group
  • Discuss next week's meeting


Proposed timeline for the next 11 days:

· June 2nd – Provide HITSC with NHIN Direct Concrete Implementation Capability Review Worksheets
· June 2nd – 7th – Hold individual HITSC reviewer meetings as needed
· June 7th - First-round HITSC NHIN Direct options review meeting
· June 8th – NHIN Direct Concrete Implementation WG “bakeoff”
· June 9th - Second-round HITSC NHIN Direct options review meeting
· June 10th – HITSC to submit NHIN Direct report & recommendation
· June 10th/11th – NHIN Direct Implementation Group face-to-face consensus vote on concrete implementations

Notes:

Comment from Sean Nolan
· Request for organizations that have not yet voted on capability worksheet to provide vote on wiki
· Security & Trust (S&T) WG wanted the concrete implementation WG to address certain S&T recommendations
· Should we add a security & trust risk analysis section to the worksheet?
Feedback on Adding Security & Trust Section to Capability Worksheet

Name
Feedback/Comment
Steven Waldren
Agree
Ravi Madduri
pass
David Kibbe
  • This kind of detailed work is not something the teams can handle
  • Could have higher level questions to be addressed by each team
Nageshwara Bashyam
Could add security capabilities to section 12
Karen Witting
We already have enough in the worksheet on security and trust
Matt Koehler
pass
Dan Kazzaz
We don’t need to add more items to the worksheet
Chris Lomonico
Security is something we should pay close attention to. Agree with David
Lidia Starry
pass
Nourich Saraf
We should closely integrate security with development efforts as early as possible
Brett Peterson
We should add these items to section 6, which addresses security and trust. We don’t have time for consensus on an updated worksheet.
Don Jorgensen
pass
Travis Grigsby
pass
Andy Heeren
OK with worksheet as is
John Moehrke
· It’s late to be adding a required section
· We should informally ask the teams to identify risks that their implementation handles. We should give guidance rather than require a new section.

Comment from Sean Nolan
· Seem to be concerns about changing worksheet in time
· Let’s add an optional section to the worksheet with a threat model
Comment from Vassil Peytchev
· We should add a note to security section to add appropriate risk section
Overview from Arien Malec of External Review Process
· Proposed to HITSC that there be a formal HITSC review of the four NHIN Direct implementation options
· The SC will designate a small review group that will include five technology reviewers. Reviewers to include John H, Ken Mandl, Stan Huff, Dixie Baker and Ashley Corbin. Carol Diamond will offer a policy perspective.
· The reviewers understand our tight timeline
· Reviewers will highlight any policy considerations
· Arien will provide the HITSC reviewers with draft capability worksheets and pointers to relevant specifications/anything describing the implementations by June 2nd
· Also will offer one-on-one time with any reviewer who requests it
o Brian will be the coordinator, Arien will attend, and team members will be pulled in as needed.

Initial proposed timeline for External Review:

o June 2nd – Provide HITSC with NHIN Direct Concrete Implementation Capability Review Worksheets
o June 2nd – 7th – Hold individual HITSC reviewer meetings as needed
o June 7th - First-round HITSC NHIN Direct options review meeting
o June 8th – NHIN Direct Concrete Implementation WG “bakeoff”
o June 9th - Second-round HITSC NHIN Direct options review meeting
o June 10th – HITSC to submit NHIN Direct report & recommendation
o June 10th/11th – NHIN Direct Implementation Group face-to-face consensus vote on concrete implementations
· HITSC reviewers will provide advice and feedback, not a decision

· Concern that these reviewers are just dropping into the process
o Arien Malec - We agreed last week to have external review
o Arien will provide cover letter to the review, including an overview of what we’re trying to accomplish, decisions made to date, etc
Comment from Arien Malec
· Risk that that we may get uniformed reviews and the timing of the review feedback may not be aligned with WG timeline
· Suggest that we spend the 8th doing a detailed review of the implementation options within the WG and call for a consensus vote on June 10th

Feedback on Initial Timeline

Name
Feedback/Comment
Steven Waldren
For those who are not at the face-to-face, how do they participate?
Ravi Madduri
Confused about timelines
David Kibbe
· Ok with timeline
· External review process is a good thing, transparency is important
· Concern that we need to keep front and center the intent of NHIN Direct: Keep it simple and about provide a dial-tone for small providers
Nageshwara Bashyam
Will provide feedback after looking at timeline
Karen Witting
Timeline is insane. Who attends each of these meetings, what are the expectations, will the HITSC report be ready in time for the consensus vote?
Matt Koehler
pass
Chris Lomonico
Agree with timeline
Lidia Starry
pass
Nourich Saraf
pass
Brett Peterson
  • Should we go forward on 8th as we planned before and get tentative consensus?
  • If the HITSC report comes out on 10th, we could have a concrete implementation meeting on the morning of the 11th
  • For tomorrow, teams should just get pages as ready as they can
Grahm Evans
pass
Brian Hoffman
pass
Don Jorgensen
pass
Travis Grigsby
pass
Andy Heeren
Fine with proposal
John Moehrke
Seems that we’ve already started to adjust our thinking that the vote will occur during the face-to-face meeting rather than on the 8th. This would be more reasonable.
Vassil Peytchev
What are the reviewers expecting as far as documentation? Things are moving fast and there will be many updates. Will reviewers participate during the June 8th discussion?


Comment from Arien Malec
· We’ve cancelled all existing meetings for the 7th and 8th and should also do so on the 9th
· Arien to schedule hour-long review meetings for the HITSC review team on June 7th and 9th
· We have more bandwidth and motivation than the reviewers to participate in the June 8th discussion
· We’ll do a full internal review of the worksheets on the 8th, taking feedback from the HITSC June 7th review meeting
· On June 8th, each team should have time to present their worksheet and for the WG to present questions & concerns
Comment from Sean Nolan
· Need to make a statement whether the decision happens on the 10th or 11th
· Suggested timeline:
o 8th can be the presentation and Q&A
o 9th for rebuttle/response
o 10th for decision-making
Comment from Arien Malec
· Will drive for HITSC report to come out end of day on the 9th

Revised proposed timeline for External Review:

· June 2nd – Provide HITSC with review packages
· June 2nd – 7th – Hold individual HITSC reviewer meetings as needed
· June 7th - First-round HITSC NHIN Direct options review meeting
· June 8th - WG to dive into details of implementation options. Two sessions:
o 11:00 -1:00 (EST)
o 2:00-4:00(EST)
· June 9th - Second-round HITSC NHIN Direct options review meeting
· June 10th – Implementation Group review of options
· June 11th – Implementation Group consensus
Question from Karen Witting
· Who is invited to HITSC meetings?
o Arien Malec – The entire WG is invited

Feedback on Revised Timeline

Name
Feedback/Comment
Steven Waldren
Agree
Ravi Madduri
pass
Wesley Combs
Agree
David Kibbe
Agree
Nageshwara Bashyam
Agree
Karen Witting
Agree
Matt Koehler
Agree
Chris Lomonico
Agree
Brett Peterson
Agree
Grahm Evans
Agree
Brian Hoffman
Agree
Don Jorgensen
pass
Chris Moyer
Agree
Travis Grigsby
pass
Andy Heeren
Agree
John Moehrke
Agree
Vassil Peytchev
Agree

Comment from Arien Malec
· Should we do a multi-voting procedure to see if there any options that aren’t in the running at all?
o Sean Nolan – Teams should voluntarily withdraw if they feel they aren’t ready

· Arien will put together the HITSC review packet and request feedback from the team