Rad Tech Minutes 2008.05.09: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) |
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
==Minutes== | ==Minutes== | ||
* Reviewed comments on Kevin O'Donnell's draft of profile | * Reviewed comments on Kevin O'Donnell's draft of profile | ||
** Addressed the security aspects of profile including implementation of ATNA | ** Addressed the security aspects of profile including implementation of ATNA | ||
** Open Issue: For profiles with security considerations, we should use the process for risk analysis currently being defined by ITI | |||
** FTP-TLS vs DICOM-TLS: DIR must choose one or the other; Registry must support both | |||
*** There will need to be separate ports defined for both (Registry must then have separate ports for FTP and DICOM | |||
Latest revision as of 11:04, 9 May 2008
Topic: Finalize Radiation Exposure Monitoring Profile
Attendees
- Cindy Levy, Merge Cedara (co-chair)
- Christoph Dickmann, Siemens
- Dick Donker, Philips
- Rob Horn, Agfa
- Kevin O'Donnell, Toshiba
- Paul Seifert, Agfa
- Lynn Felhofer, Tech Proj Mgr
Minutes
- Reviewed comments on Kevin O'Donnell's draft of profile
- Addressed the security aspects of profile including implementation of ATNA
- Open Issue: For profiles with security considerations, we should use the process for risk analysis currently being defined by ITI
- FTP-TLS vs DICOM-TLS: DIR must choose one or the other; Registry must support both
- There will need to be separate ports defined for both (Registry must then have separate ports for FTP and DICOM