ROUGH draft of "sufficient" technique for SC 2.2.4

Per my assignment, attached as html file is a very rough draft of 
"sufficient" technique for SC 2.2.4.
I wanted to get comments/feedback before I attempt to update the wiki.

Some questions:

(1) What is the specific scope of this technique, in terms of the origin of the
timing requirement?  What about timing requirement that are imposed by
sources other than the author vs. those timeouts created by the author of 
an activity
working in a technology supporting that activity? (that is, is there a 
clear distinction between
these two categories or is the distinction somewhat subjective?)

(2) How is the measure of successful accomplishment of this technique made?
Just in terms of the design or in terms of the actual implementation of the 
An activity could be designed for no timed interactions, but in 
implementation could
actually have timed interaction requirements imposed (re: (1) previous) ).
If a design has a "preview" or "intermediate simulation" status with no 
timed interaction
present, would that be enough to claim success?
If a plan is formed for an activity, without any implementation, does that 
meet this SC?

(3) What is the specific definition of an "activity" in this 
context?  "Design" of an activity?

(4) This technique is Level 3, but are there performance/security issues 
that would make it
difficult or impossible to develop a design to meet this SC?

Is this approach generally in the right direction?  Comments and feedback 

Thanks and best wishes
Tim Boland NIST  

Received on Friday, 13 January 2006 14:47:08 UTC