Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 23:56:25 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <1285214500.7219.1711670185330@ip-10-10-7-29.ec2.internal>
Subject: Exported From Confluence
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/related;
boundary="----=_Part_7218_842374706.1711670185328"
------=_Part_7218_842374706.1711670185328
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Location: file:///C:/exported.html
Attributes for Coll=
aboration and Federation
C=
all of Thursday, Nov. 9, 2017
Att=
ending
- Brad Christ, Southern Oregon University (chair)
- Mark Scheible, MCNC
- Tom Barton, University of Chicago / Internet2
- Brett Bieber, University of Nebraska
- Ted Hanss, University of Michigan
- Emily Eisbruch, InCommon/Internet2
Working Group Resources
- Wiki: https://spaces.=
at.internet2.edu/x/ipiTBg
- Charter: https://spaces.at.internet=
2.edu/x/VgPABg
- List: attributes@incommon.org
Action Items from this call
[AI] (Brad) make a clone of the Steering R&S roadmap and modify it (=
Done)
[AI] (TomB) continue collecting data on users of R&S infrastru=
cture in the US and report back to this working group.
[AI] (Brad) draft some common questions for outreach around whethe=
r your institution participates in R&S and if not why not and reach out=
to NWAC on this (Done)
[AI (Tom) will develop a selection of institutions for the outreach arou=
nd R&S , for probing around participation in R&S or lack of i=
t and why
DISCUSSION:
Review of 2017 TechEx Meeting feedback
Mark highlighted key points from the 2017 Tech Ex Attributes Working Gro=
up Meeting and consolidated some at the bottom of this Google Doc=
.
Key points from the TechEx working group meeting:
- There were comments at the Tech Ex meeting around identifying what has =
been preventing the release of R&S Attributes. That=E2=80=99s what this=
WG needs to understand and come up with mitigation.
- Communication is one way of increasing the number of institutions that =
release R&S.
- Are research and scholarship different? One participant at the BOF said=
they don=E2=80=99t have researchers at their institution. That insti=
tution participates in LIGO. Sometimes central IT does not know what resear=
chers are doing on the campus.
- Email is a key attribute for many research SPs.
- The best approach may bey to focus on communication, including how comm=
unication happens and who the message is communicated to. The person runnin=
g the IDP may create attribute release policies for specific SPs and may no=
t know how to implement R&S. May not know who to go to for approval, so=
they don=E2=80=99t implement R&S. Perhaps we need to work with C=
IOs and perhaps we need to inform the CIOs know that NOT releasing R&S =
causes issues for the researchers.
- Mark=E2=80=99s Example: =E2=80=9CAt MCNC, we have a community portal wh=
ich contains reports and other information for our constituents. We recentl=
y upgraded to a new version of Drupal (with a new SP and entity ID). One of=
the universities could not get into the new portal because they didn=E2=80=
=99t have an attribute release policy (ARP) for the new SP. They ment=
ioned if the new SP had been R&S they could have gotten in without a pr=
oblem. It resulted in them needing to modify their ARP for the portal=
.=E2=80=9D
- At Virginia Tech they have found that a good policy is to release R&=
;S across the board (much less work and maintenance) and to implement=
consent (to deal with legal concerns).
Additional comments
- Need to let people know that the risk is not perhaps as big as perceive=
d. Can use consent to mitigate risk.
- It is disappointing the number of R1 institutions participating in R&am=
p;S.
- If you release R&S, it is not to every SP your users access. =
It is only being released to those SPs who have been approved for the R&=
;S category. But that is not always made clear. Important to ho=
ne the message and get to the right audience.
- Need to communicate to the right person, might not be the exec defined =
in InCommon.
- When R&S was released it was not clear how much work was involved. =
The documentation was very technical, but perhaps hard to follow. Need simp=
ler documentation. Eyes may glaze over the current documentation and instit=
utions may say =E2=80=9CI am not going to bother.=E2=80=9D
- Proposal/suggestion of enabling by default. (e.g. via the TIER Docker c=
ontainers)
- Use messaging to emphasize that R&S is a great benefit to faculty a=
nd staff.
- Provide tangible examples of the benefit
- We may have been focusing too narrowly regarding R&S.
- Some audiences may not be familiar with federation and may need broader=
education.
- The word "Metadata" can create red flags. Skip the word metadata p=
erhaps in the messaging; Talk instead about directory data the way FER=
PA does, or specifically mention the R&S Attributes by (common) name,=
li>
- We should talk about the library use case, and explain to librarians th=
at R&S can address some of librarians' concerns, especially for inter-i=
nstitution use of the library.
Summary and Next Steps
- Roadmap (first item in ch=
arter)
- Communication to right level
- Education (Good material in UC Davis thread on the InCommon Participants email list)
- Simplify the doc (explain not a big deal technically)
- Bundling
- Use Shib to set default
- =E2=80=A8After Roadmap is formed, come up with policy recommendat=
ion to Steering
- Steering has an attribute release roadmap doc
- It=E2=80=99s a table with tasks, it=E2=80=99s a plan, and we could=
revise it.
- [AI] (Brad) make a clone of the Steering R&S roadmap and modify it =
(done)
Should we update the charter for this working group? https://spaces.at.internet2.edu/x/V=
gPABg
Decision: no need to revise the charter at this time
Pal Axelsson, author of GEANT assessment of impact of GDPR, published a =
paper yesterday. TomB and Pal will be working on a blog on that topic=
.
TomB has been collecting data on users of Research and Science infrastru=
ctures in US. XSEDE
(https://www.xse=
de.org/), Globus, etc. Starting a good list.
[AI] (TomB) continue collecting data on users of R&S infrastru=
cture in the US and report back to this working group.
Outreach to CIOs and others around R&S
It was decided that members of this Attributes working group should spea=
k to various size institutions who do not currently participate and find ou=
t why. Each of the WG members will make a few calls.
[AI] (Brad) draft some common questions for outreach around whethe=
r your institution participates in R&S and if not why not and reach out=
to NWAC on this (Done)
We should be sure we are reaching out to various size institutions. Ther=
e is a grouping of the InCommon participants list by TIER. Tom can share th=
at data.
[AI (TomB) will develop a selection of institutions for the outreach aro=
und R&S, for probing around participation in R&S or lack of i=
t and why
Next Call Thursday,. Dec 7, 2017
(Nov 23, 2=
017 cancelled due to Thanksgiving)
------=_Part_7218_842374706.1711670185328--