CTAB Call of Wed. Jan. 16, 2019
- Mary Catherine Martinez, InnoSoft (chair)
- Brett Bieber, University of Nebraska
- David Bantz, University of Alaska
- Tom Barton, University Chicago and Internet2
- Chris Whalen, Research Data and Communication Technologies
- John Hover, Brookhaven National Lab - guest
- Rachana Ananthakrishnan, Globus, University of Chicago - guest
- Adam Lewenberg, Stanford - guest
- Albert Wu, Internet2
- Ann West, Internet2
- Kevin Morooney, Internet2
- Emily Eisbruch, Internet2
- Ted Hanss, Yale
- Chris Hable, University of Michigan
- Jon Miner, University of Wisc - Madison
[AI] (Albert) will set up the Slack channel (Done)
[AI] (Albert and MC and TomB and Adam and Rachana) will work on the CTAB roadmap chronology. Albert will set up a call.
- Decision to set up a CTAB Slack Channel
- AI Albert will set up the Slack channel
CTAB Membership Update
- MC and TomB did outreach to each of the the CTAB candidates
- Hope to move all four names from the proposed slate to the InCommon Steering for approval,
- Vice Chair election - need to have a vice chair by Steering approval on 2/4
- Elect vice chair by Jan 23, 2019
- If interested in being Vice Chair, please email MC or CTAB
- AI [MC] email the CTAB list and ask anyone interested in being Vice Chair to email her. (Done)
- CTAB Charter http://doi.org/10.26869/TI.94.1
- Last year, the vice chair (MC) was elected on a CTAB call
- Kevin notes that InCommon Steering is also welcoming new members this year.
- Steering will be voting on new chair and vice chair
- Steering changes should be in place by early February
2019 CTAB Roadmap
- CTAB Planning call Jan 11, 2019 participants: David, Jon Miner, ChrisW, and Albert
- Logistics for CTAB recruitment, etc.
- What should be next steps around Baseline Expectations?
- Community Dispute Resolution Process, should we continue to flesh out details?
- What is CTAB’s role?
- Creating Code of conduct ; practices, interoperability support, federation support, etc? (badging)
- How to prioritize the work?
- What should be the chronology? Roadmap?
- There is a set of community consensus process items
- We should slot those issues and decisions in throughout the year
- Need to figure out the sustainable cadence
- Albert: since we have just finished the success of most of the community meeting baseline expectations
- Should we keep the momentum going while the community is paying attention?
- Approach this in a time-boxed fashion
- Perhaps make baseline validation an annual event
- And publish/refine the baseline expectations each year.
- Then figure out what’s doable in a year
- Agreed that a regular cadence is good
- Some BE issues might fall more on IDPs and some might fall more on SPs
- A lot of details to work through
- Should we spin off in sub groups to work on some of the issues?
- Brett: walk through these issues as a group for now
- Last year we did some table top exercises to test the community dispute resolution process
- Idea was that in some cases, there could be a point person
- Brett: first challenge could be addressing the few orgs that do not meet baseline
- Then address a few of the next issues as a group.
- Later, perhaps assign a subgroup or point person
- It’s a new process of how to handle Baseline Expectations
- In 2018 CTAB talked about creating subgroups, seems good to have the whole of CTAB work on issues at first
- TomB: to get the roadmap chronology fleshed out, it would be good if the committee could come up with a strawman.
- [AI] (Albert and MC and TomB and Adam and Rachana) will work on the CTAB roadmap chronology. Albert will set up a call.
- Any single consensus topic could take a month or two.
- CTAB could prioritize which to tackle and which order.
- Currently restricted access for the list of entities not meeting Baseline Expectations
- This list is being automatically updated daily
- Two purposes for this soon to be public list:
- Helps protect your org if you want to know which federation players are not meeting BE
- Also this list is partly an ask for help to get last few percent of orgs across the finish line of meeting BE
- In some cases, our substantial outreach may not have reached these orgs
- Q: What about an org that thinks they are meeting BE but they are not?
- A: We have sent many emails (health check emails) to their contacts
- this list comes from the biweekly health checklist
- There are about 59 organizations and 200 entities on this list
- This is the last 5%
- Now 95% of orgs meet Baseline Expectations
- Started in 2018 with only 16% of orgs meeting BE
- Some of the orgs not meeting BE may not have any contacts in their metadata
- In one case, the main contacts have been on leave, we finally reached out to a different contact
- Q: who does the outreach to the organizations that don’t meet BE? InCommon staff or CTAB members?
- A: A combination…. Two excellent contractors (David Walker and Renee Shuey) did much outreach
- Comment: a lot of outreach has been done. It’s OK to make this list public
- Albert will be happy to provide more background on the efforts so far around
- What do we do with private docket next?
- How does CTAB move through the docket list?
- Do we want to revisit Health Check email considering we have 71 orgs left, especially if we advance all orgs missing BE into the dockets?
- Do we advance all orgs missing BE into the dockets (31 vs 71)
Next CTAB calls: Wed Jan. 23, 2019 and Wed. Jan. 30
- Note that currently CTAB calls are schedule to return to biweekly in February
- with no CTAB call on Wed. Feb. 6