This page should be taken as nothing more than a spur to further discussion.
- The REFEDs IOLR WG has developed a vetted list of requirements that an IdP would have to meet in order to serve the need for an Un-Affiliated IdP
- The WG wants to define a standard process by which federations can assess candidate Un-Affiliated IdP providers and tag the approved Un-Affiliated IdPs.
- The WG wants to assure the long-term stability of identifiers issued by Un-Affiliated IdP providers.
- The WG wants to assure that a person always has the option to migrate from one Un-Affiliated IdP to another.
- The WG wants to assure that Un-Affiliated IdP services are continuously available as long as they are filling a need for the Research and Scholarship community.
An Approach for Discussion
- The REFEDS IOLR Working Group will draft and seek community evaluation of a REFEDS-level Un-Affiliated IdP entity category
- The entity category tag will be defined as self-asserted
- People should be encouraged to establish accounts with more than one self-declared Un-Affiliated IdP
- The trustworthiness of self-asserted Un-Affiliated IdP tags should be addressed by the community of Refeds R&S relying parties in dialogue with Un-Affiliated IdP operators.
Just wanted to add my two cents to this part of the discussion. eduGAIN is a service, not a federation. I would get nervous if eduGAIN were to inject metadata into its aggregate.
I agree with Ian, REFEDS is the correct venue for discussing and/or standardizing entity categories.
I understand the goals outlined at the top of the document but I don't understand how you intend to achieve those goals. I think it's too early to be talking about "tagging an ORSID," or perhaps I missed part of the discussion.