spaces.at.internet2.edu has been upgraded to Confluence 6.12.2. If you have any questions and/or concerns, please contact us at collaboration-support@internet2.edu
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

InCommon Steering Meeting Minutes – 20 May 2013

Attending: Jack Suess, Mark Crase, Rodney Petersen, Chris Holmes, Joel Cooper, Ardoth Hassler, Ken Klingenstein, Michael Gettes, John O’Keefe, Steve Carmody, Kevin Morooney, Klara Jelinkova

With: John Krienke

Procedure to Approve and Post Minutes

  • InCommon LLC bylaws call for minutes to be posted publicly within 30 days
  • Future Steering agendas will include approval of minutes for the previous meeting as the first item of business

Approval of Minutes

The minutes of the April 24 meeting were approved (with the provision to remove the links to non-public pages).

Planning 2014

Jack reviewed the Planning 2014 process and reviewed Steering responsibilities derived from the InCommon charter and bylaws, the items that are delegated to the Chief Operating Officer, and lists of products and relationships that fall under (or should fall under) the aegis of Steering.

Steering may choose to delegate day-to-day responsibility for some items to either staff or other committees (for example, the Assurance Advisory Committee). In such cases, there will be an expectation of a periodic report (annual, semi-annual, quarterly, monthly). Some standard contracts (for example, the participation agreement) will not require Steering approval or review.
There was discussion about managing the relationships that InCommon has with various organizations. For the Shibboleth Consortium, for example, InCommon should nominate the U.S. representative for the board, and this person would also be ex officio to Steering. There is also the need to develop a roadmap of our technical requirements, and work through our representative to the Shib Consortium to influence their priorities and to understand their resource requirements.

The Planning 2014 process anticipates similar arrangements with other identity consortia (such as CIFER) and projects. The planning process will also inform the need for additional staff for InCommon. The consensus was to define InCommon’s needs, based on the planning document, and then determine the appropriate staffing required.

NEXT MEETING

June 3, 2013

  • No labels