Agenda

Attending: Ann West, Brad Christ, Dave Robinson, Chris Misra, Rachana Ananthakrishnan, Christine Miki, Jeremy Livingston, Laura Paglione, Marc Wallman

With  David Bantz, Kevin Morooney,  Elaine Alejo, Rob Carter, Albert Wu, Steve Zoppi 

Regrets: Kristi Holmes

Minutes:  

Baseline Expectations

  • David Bantz reviewed the status of Baseline Expectations V2, and the Closing Actions. We have substantial compliance of 95% or better but there are a hand full of entities that are not compliant and broken down into 4 groups as follows:
    • Group 1  are organizations that have communicated with us that the registered entities are no longer needed but have not been removed.  Will be flagged inactive so it is easier to add back.
    • Group 2 Service providers missing BE2 requirements-  Most of these registered entities have not checked the SIRTFI box in the Federation Manager portal.
      • The proposal is to set a date and inform them that they are subject to removal and give them a date.
    • Group 3 Identity providers missing BE2 requirements- still providing federated services.
      • The proposal is to reach out to them and inform them that starting in mid-Jan  they will be removed ( only 2 have not said anything at all, the others have reached out to us but haven't acted yet) 
    • Group 4 - False Readings- (that have all been resolved as of now) 
  • Recommendation is to NOT take any action regarding Group 4.
  • Recommendations for Groups 1-3 is to send notice that after a time they will be dropped and metadata removed.

It was asked if there was a process in place before anyone is pulled. David Bantz expressed that there has been more than a couple of emails sent over the last 2 years, and phone calls were made.  Albert Wu added that the 3rd or 4th round of notices have been sent out. There are some that are working with us where they have technical issues and we will work with them.  There are some others that have responded to invoices and would like to withdraw.  Albert is looking to set up a default action.  

There was concern that  we need more than a couple of emails, there needs to be a follow through.  Discussion  about the business risk to InCommon down the road, is there something else we can do to reach the executives?

It was explained that over the years we have seen a slide of the InCommon  executive function assignment, when we get down to the last view schools their roles  aren't very accurate and their contacts aren't listed , and that's why we are asking for everyone's help to reach out . The idP list is the biggest risk and will be treated accordingly. 

Several felt  that a direct outreach to the CIO’s would be good.   Some are just missing SIRTFi acknowledgement which is basically just saying we will comply; shouldn't SIRTFi just be considered  part of a "Terms of Service"?  Ann explained that technically they are required to follow Baseline Expectations by the legal agreement so you could say it is part of our service.

  • One proposal is to roll the SIRTFi non compliant into inheritance category with the understanding that we have a policy issue that we may have to judicate  through community dispute process.  

There was discussion amongst the group with some suggestions on reaching out to folks.  InCommon will start work on developing a periodic contact checking process next year. It was confirmed  that organizations already publish their security contact as part of BE 1.

 Removing their entities is the last resort if they're not responding to us. 

Steering Roster fo 2023

Brad opened the conversation with the point that Steering will vote by email so we have time for discussion.

Kevin gave a brief overview of the approving of the slate of Candidates for the current vacancies 

  • 11 current members
  • 3 expiring CIO's
  • Current roster max 13
  • Could put a Research person to fill the third spot
  • 4 people falling off next year- Kristi, Jeremy, Laura, Chris M
  • 2 names will be submitted per position that  Kevin will take to the CEO
  • We can welcome new members in Dec and  elect officers at that time
  • Slates were decided and submitted.

Questions or concerns:

It was suggested to the  group that we  defer the research slate to next year.

There was agreement to move forward with a vote to accept CTAB's recommendation.

The election slate will be discussed with executive committee and get a link out to vote as soon as possible.

Next meeting will be moved to Dec 12th due to Tech Ex.


  • Meeting adjourned 



  • No labels