Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

CTAB Wed., Aug 14, 2019

 Attending

  • Mary Catherine Martinez, InnoSoft (chair) 
  • David Bantz, University of Alaska (vice chair) 
  • Brett Bieber, University of Nebraska  
  • Rachana Ananthakrishnan, Globus, University of Chicago 
  • Brad Christ, Eastern Washington University 
  • Eric Goodman, UCOP - TAC Representative to CTAB  
  • Adam Lewenberg , Stanford  
  • Jon Miner, University of Wisc - Madison 
  • John Pfeifer, University of Maryland  
  • Emily Eisbruch, Internet2  

Regrets

  • Chris Whalen, Research Data and Communication Technologies 
  • Chris Hable, University of Michigan
  • John Hover, Brookhaven National Lab 
  • Tom Barton, University Chicago and Internet2 
  • Ann West, Internet2 
  • Albert Wu, Internet2 

Action Items

  • [AI] (MC and David) produce first draft of blog about BE V2 survey results by  next CTAB call   Aug 28
  • [AI] Emily reach out to Dean about upcoming blog on BE V2 Survey results and deadline for inclusion in an InCommon newsletter (done, deadline is Aug. 23, 2019)

Discussion

  • Baseline Expectations v2 survey response 
    • Received 86 responses
    • How to we publish results to the community? 
    • Decision:  publish a blog  summarizing the results  
    • [AI] (MC and David) produce first draft of blog about BE V2 survey results by  next CTAB call Aug 28
  • Drafting Baseline v2 document and submit for community consensus
    • Proposed Schedule:
    •   Blog - end of Aug
    •   Draft of actual BE v2 doc- end of Sept
    •   Community consensus -  starts by Oct.

    • BE v2 community consensus process:   
    • Idea: smaller group(s) to write clear positions on what each of the elements mean - what it is, what it means to implementers, what it means to users, impact of
    • implementation technology evolution has on how we phrase Baseline statements, etc. 
    • Will need volunteers/conscripts to convene discussion; set deadline
    • likely for subgroup and/or 8/30 discussion
  • There is a need to clarify what CTAB really recommending in Baseline relative to “REFEDs MFA”
  • What does support REFEDS MFA Profile mean for each party in Federation? https://wiki.refeds.org/display/PRO/MFA+Profile+FAQ
  • Could follow up on the results from the survey. 
  • REFEDs MFA 
    • Requiring MFA as part of baseline does not mean you must implement MFA. But if you do, here is the  type of response required, and define that exactly. 
    • We should also explain “failure case”: If you don’t have MFA, what should the response be. 
      • The idea is NOT to  fail with an opaque or unexplained error
    • IDP must be configured a certain way to handle the REFEDs  MFA error case gracefully
    • EricG has been working on this issue at UCOP, for Shib IDPs, no cookbook for that yet
    • Discuss this more on next CTAB call 
    • Should we include foreshadowing of BE v3, perhaps in the blog?


    • R&S attributes being released by default as part of BE - likely for subgroup and/or 8/30 discussion
      • Helpful to get to the bottom of the concerns about R&S,  loss of control is one concern.
      • The question gets asked “what is legal recourse?”  In fact there is no legal recourse, but the risk is small. 
      • Find out what could be added to SIRTFI to make the next step successful
      • An argument for including R&S in baseline v2 could be to motivate a more meaningful discussion
      • SPs are in favor of R&S, and this was heard in the work of the Attributes for Collaboration and Federation WG.  http://doi.org/10.26869/TI.101.1
      • R&S, or other attribute release, includes the value of the InCommon Federation.
      • Currently there is a need for a lot of one-off attribute release to individual Service Providers
      • With rise of Web AUTHN and FIDO, credentials will become less of a big deal
      • In that environment, Value of IDPs could decrease
      • Without R&S, there will be workarounds, not involving InCommon, including social media and other less secure approaches
      • The role of consent is important in the discussion also


  • Update on  SIRTFI/CTAB taskforce on issues of metadata freshness/accuracy:  a meeting has been scheduled
    • Proposal was: SIRTFI and CTAB work together on exploring these issues of accurate, fresh metadata, for SIRTFI and then take the learnings to other federations to make this a global issue. 
    • Volunteers  are David Bantz , ChrisW, Albert, ScottK and TomB
    • Albert will convene the group

Next CTAB call: Aug. 28, 2019

 

  • No labels