Minutes

Attending: Heather Flanagan,,Janemarie Duh, Judith Bush,  Keith Wessel, Eric Goodman, Mark Rank, Mary McKee, Matthew Brookover, Steven Premeau, Matthew Economou

With (Also Starring): David Walker, Albert Wu, Ann West, David Bantz, IJ Kim, Johnny Lasker

Regrets: (none)

Status Updates / Q&A

• T&I and Ops Updates (Ann/Nic/Albert/Shannon/Dave/Johnny)
  • We’re at ~30% Baseline Expectations 2 compliance. Progress can be followed at https://spaces.at.internet2.edu/display/be.
  • A new version of the Federation Manager was released this week.
• International Update & SeamlessAccess Update
  • A SeamlessAccess workshop for federation operators is coming up. ~40 people have already signed up.
  • The proposal for an analytics attribute is nearing completion.
• Working and liaison group updates - including 2021 plan items
  • Federation 2.0
  • Federation Test Working Group
    • There have been only six signups so far. Janemarie is looking for outreach strategies.
    • Possibilities
      • A TAC IAM Online (if we have one)?
      • REFEDS's SP list (spog@lists.refeds.org)
      • An ACAMP session
      • The full CAMP list

Recap and discussion on browser interaction

• Heather convened an "identity flash mob" on 5/4/2021. Slides are available at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-XUTMYrY-2ugagOCj92tjaYxh0Mp-w3w/view?usp=sharing.
• Notable issues
  • Cookies are going away. Shib doesn’t need them, except for SLO
  • Cookies are the first step. We’ll see other anti-tracking measures, such as link decoration.
• There will be a two-day workshop 5/25-5/26. At least some of the big players are expected to be there.
• Use cases are being collected in https://github.com/IDBrowserUseCases/docs
  • You can find all contributed scenarios in docs/src/scenarios (https://github.com/IDBrowserUseCases/docs/tree/main/src/).
• Shib doesn’t need cookies, but there are SAML implementations that do.
  • We’ll need to provide some examples of those implementations.
  • (This is an opportunity to point a finger at - likely substandard for multiple reasons - implementations.)
  • Problem is that it’s often the case that customers have to be told to file a complaint. Federation operators have difficulty intervening.
• It could be productive to involve people from EDUCAUSE, Slate, Canvas, etc. in the discussion.
  • Mark will see who’s interested.
  • Also HECVAT
• Heather is working with Google about Scott Cantor’s session cookie proposal.
  • Judith has started drafting a summary what has been discussed in recent email at https://spaces.at.internet2.edu/display/inctac/Session+Cookie+Suggestion

Deployment Profile Next Steps  - Discussion

• https://spaces.at.internet2.edu/display/inctac/Deployment+Profile+TAC+Review
• Steering will want to know about impacts of the recommendations. We have per-item impacts (aligned with the “adopt now / adopt later” designations). We should add a short statement summarizing community impact.
• The next Steering meeting is in June. We'll shoot for formal TAC approval of the document in time to put it on that agenda.

EMail Updates

Federation 2.0

We’ve got a statement that captures our main recommendation:

“The key outcome is to address global challenges with a coordinated response which we have coined the term “Academic Interfederation”, this would be achieved by establishing an effective global leadership, advocacy and governance body.”

Drafting continues, but an end is in sight.

Federation Test Working Group

Houston, we have a problem.

I sent announcements about the Test Fed WG to the Participants, EDUCAUSE IAM, and REFEDS lists. Yet, only six people subscribed to the mail list.

Tim Lloyd had asked questions about the co-chair commitment as he is involved in a number of other groups and had a concern about time commitment. I haven't heard back from him to confirm one way or the other.

Let's talk tomorrow about other ways to drum up interest in the group.

Thanks.

     Janemarie