Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

 

Attending

Members

  • Chris Phillips, CANARIE  (chair)
  • Rob Carter, Duke   
  • Nathan Dors, U Washington   
  • Karen Herrington, Virginia Tech   
  • Todd Higgins, Franklin & Marshall College   
  • Tom Jordan, U Wisc - Madison    
  • Christos Kanellopoulos, GEANT   
  • Les LaCroix, Carleton College     

Internet2

  • Kevin Morooney   
  • Ann West   
  • Steve Zoppi    
  • Emily Eisbruch   

Regrets

  • Warren Anderson, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee /LIGO  
  • Tom Barton, U Chicago   
  • Jill Gemmill, Clemson   
  • Ann Harding, SWITCH/GEANT  

 
 Action items here:   https://spaces.at.internet2.edu/x/GoPdBg   

 Reminder: items being sought for REFEDS workplan 2018: https://wiki.refeds.org/display/WOR/2018+Work+Plan+Preparation 

DISCUSSION

Helpful Reference:

Main Business 

Trust and Identity Roadmap  (Chris, others also attending TAC)

  • Exploring how CACTI can assist/complement InC-Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and how the two groups might work together toward Internet2 Trust and Identity goals

  • Chris will be attending April 12, 2018 InCommon TAC meeting and is seeking feedback and insight for it.

  • Most recent published Inc-TAC minutes: InCommon TAC Meeting 2018-02-15 / InC-TAC wiki: https://spaces.at.internet2.edu/display/inctac
  • InCommon TAC is reviewing its charter in the new context, since CACTI and T&I PAG have started since the time that charter was written: https://www.incommon.org/docs/policies/TACcharter.html
  • Seed to the conversation: What could InC-TAC take advantage of from  DeploymentProfile-WG outputs? 

  • Other recommended topics TAC should focus on or +1's to items in above meeting notes we can pass on?

  • Currently some overlap in what InCommon InCommon TAC and CACTI are looking at.

  • Deployment profile definition and Baseline Expectations are important areas.

  • Comment: CACTI focuses heavily on Federation. But the needs of the research community are broader than federation.  And in some areas federation is “behind” in addressing researcher needs. Security is important, FIM4R-defined issues are important. 
https://fim4r.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/FIM4R-Requirements-FROZEN-March-1st-TIIME-2018.pdf
  •  TAC might want to address the need to evolve the federation,  including additional of another protocol. 
  • Christos: In Europe, there is move away from monolithic federation model.  Towards multi protocol. OPENID connect approach..
  • Federation does not need to be IDP centric.  We may elevate users. 

  •  See blog https://aarc-project.eu/one-aai-platform-to-support-life-science/
  •  Identity providers can include Google and Facebook etc in addition to traditional IdPs

  • User Centric identity paper from GEANT: https://www.geant.org/Projects/GEANT_Project_GN4/deliverables/D9-3_Best-Practice-for-User-Centric-Federated-Identity.pdf
  • In Europe there is a need to engage multiple actors.  EGI organization for example. https://www.egi.eu/ Must get out of comfort zone. Can mean compromise. Do not create profiles in a vacuum.  

  •  It’s about going to the research communities and talking to them

  • Deployment profiles are very detailed and aspirational. 

  • How should the InCommon Federation adopt the Kantara Profile?  Right now it is aspirational.
 https://kantarainitiative.org/reports-recommendations/?api=v2
  • Interesting to look at the role of TAC and CTAB (Community Trust Advisory Board) for defining expectations for interfederation. 
    • CACTI might help facilitate adoption of a roadmap from TAC and make that part of federation membership. 

  • Potentailly CTAB (Community Trust Advisory Board)  might define the minimum baseline expectations for various service capabilities, as well as stating which items in the profiles are desirable but not baseline.

  • What does SAML interop look like in context of edugain? Much opportunity for diversity.  Edugain hopes to be protocol agnostic. 

  • Where is the best home for Guidance for Federation best practices?

  •  Our Comfort Zone is sometimes the IDP side more than the Relying Party side

  •  Can we reach out better to the influencers within FIM4R?

  • Need to amplify the “year of the Service Provider” tag line

  • Which are the SPs we should be supporting better and we should reach out to? 

    • We are most familiar with LIGO in the science research space




Planning the next few topics meetings – input sought 

  •  Is there a topic we are not getting to that we should?

  •  Upcoming: April 3 CACTI Call: Guest attendee Brett Beiber (InCommon-CTAB) to attend CACTI call to talk about Baseline Expectations and the road ahead


Community Reports  



  • Upcoming Conferences
    • Global Summit 2018: CACTI is scheduled for Tuesday, May 8, 7:30AM-8:30AM

    • 2018 Tech Ex call for proposals is going out soon. 
      • Nathan is on the program committee. 
      • CACTI may want to encourage proposals in certain areas… to be discussed.

    • TNC18: Mid June: Key points and topics we want to advance or highlight?



Next CACTI Call:  Tuesday, April 3, at 11am ET