CTAB Call of Wed. Dec. 19, 2018
Attending
Brett Bieber, University of Nebraska (chair)
Mary Catherine Martinez, InnoSoft (vice chair)
David Bantz, University of Alaska
Tom Barton, University Chicago and Internet2
Jon Miner, University of Wisc - Madison -
Joanna Rojas, Duke
Chris Whalen, Research Data and Communication Technologies -
Albert Wu, Internet2
Emily Eisbruch, Internet2
Regrets
Chris Hable, University of Michigan
Ted Hanss, Yale
Ann West, Internet2
Action Items
[AI] (TomB and MC) do outreach to CTAB candidates to answer any questions about CTAB
[AI] (Albert) will bring roadmap group (DavidW and ChrisW and JonM if available) together for 2nd week in January
Discussion
BE Extension Request Tracking Document
13 extension requests were received
CTAB did not have objections to any of the extension request
Q : How many orgs do not meet BE and have not requested extension?
A : 78 orgs
Should every CTAB member need to put their name in the “CTAB approve” column of the spreadsheet? For the time being, yes.
We may want InCommon Ops to do regular monitoring of the progress of those orgs (through contacts) who said they would meet BE within one or two months
Albert has waited 24 hours for CTAB to chime in, then sends out message that extension accepted.
Our email list to those not yet meeting BE includes everybody who requested extension…
DECISION: modify the health check email to say “even if you’ve requested an extension you will still receive this.”
[AI] MC will work with Albert on this edit (DONE)
BE Status Report / Engagement Tracking
There are 5 priority 2 orgs on the list of those not meeting baseline. (Priority 2 means L1 HE Org)
One has requested an extension.
Albert is doing outreach to contacts where possible
Should we more public with the list of those not meeting BE? To be discussed on next CTAB call.
The list is on the wiki but we have not drawn attention to it.
Health check email could indicate the upcoming consequences
Personal outreach would be good versus sending same automated email to same people
KevinM and AnnW might be willing to make calls, especially to the L1 orgs
Focus on trying to get all L1s to comply
When contacting orgs, be aware if there is more than one IDP
Albert hopes to reconcile what Service management is doing in terms of role validation to get into federation manager
Decision: Use Column J in tracking sheet to coordinate who is contacting which org
At next CTAB call we will continue discussion on how to reduce the list of those not complying
Post-deadline Health Check email template (Albert)
May want to mention the dispute resolution process in the email, though there’s a concern about his email getting too long
How long will we offer the option to request an extension?
Current form allows up until March 14, 2019
Suggestion to make this email shorter as we get closer to March 14
CTAB 2019 roadmap and arc of work
...
It makes sense to schedule these topics for CTAB in 2019:
...
Dispute process for Phase 1
...
Consensus process for "Academic IdPs implement R&S" as an enhancement to BE
...
Consensus process to add SIRTFI to BE as meeting BE #3 for IdPs and SPs
...
Consensus process to add errorURL to BE metadata expectations
...
Other CDRP topics:
Jan. 2, 2019
...
IdPs susceptible to ROBOT attack
...
Perhaps a swim lane diagram for 2019
...
AI Albert will bring roadmap group (DavidW and ChrisW and JonM if available) together for 2nd week in January
CTAB Recruiting
If we accept all nomination we will be at 12 voting members.
We would be adding 2 research reps and 2 large universities.
Joanna did some outreach to audit committee and did not get response back. Auditor on CTAB can fill an important role regarding thinking about and recommending process design
All nominees were provisionally accepted by CTAB, pending outreach by MC and TomB and then Steering approval.
[AI] (TomB and MC) do outreach to the CTAB candidates to answer any questions about CTAB
This is the last CTAB call of 2018. Thanks for all the great work this year
Next CTAB Call: Wed Jan. 2, 2019