Versions Compared

Old Version 2

changes.mady.by.user Dean Woodbeck (internet2.edu)

Saved on

compared with

New Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Dean Woodbeck (internet2.edu)

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: Migrated to Confluence 4.0

...

  • Keith Hazelton (along with Jim Basney and Steve Olshansky) drafted a charter for this WG. The goal is to assess the feasibility of UnitedID as an IdPoLR in the InCommon Federation.
  • The charter is very much a first draft so feedback and input is very much welcome at this point.
  • Wiki MarkupA basic assumption is that ProtectNetwork no longer meets the needs of the Federation. \ [This begs the questions: Why?\]
  • The primary deliverable is to document the requirements for any IdPoLR and then to determine if UnitedID meets the requirements. Provide a detailed gap analysis if necessary.
  • Describe the sustainability requirements of any IdPoLR (and UnitedID, in particular). Note that today UnitedID is funded purely on the basis of donations.
  • Another deliverable is to explore the tradeoffs between a traditional IdPoLR (like ProtectNetwork or UnitedID) and a social-to-SAML gateway. If there are other approaches to IdPoLR, include them in the analysis as well.
  • If UnitedID satisfies the general requirements for an IdPoLR, the WG will outline the tasks and technical considerations needed to move this forward.
  • Q: Is this WG specifically focused on UnitedID or is it meant to address the IdPoLR question more generally?
  • Q: Do we even have the right folks on board to answer questions about UnitedID?
  • Consensus: The concept of IdPoLR is not new and it’s doubtful a WG will be able to bring anything new to bear on that issue over the span of three months. If that’s true, then the WG really is about UnitedID as an IdPoLR in the InCommon Federation.
  • Recent news regarding ProtectNetwork prices increases is driving this interest in a supported IdPoLR.
  • Q: What’s special about UnitedID compared to any other prospective IdPoLR?
    UnitedID vs a sustainable IdPoLR for InCommon participants are probably two separate (and orthogonal?) goals.
  • Q: Why hasn’t UnitedID joined InCommon already? What are the barriers?
  • A gateway can become a persistent presence in the Federation. The IdPs behind the gateway can come and go, but the gateway itself is run by and for InCommon.
  • Suggestion: Take the word “UnitedID” out of the charter title and continue this great conversation in the WG itself. The fact that we’re having this in depth conversation indicates the need for a WG (but perhaps not the one that was originally intended).
  • Observation: This WG is starting to overlap with the Alternative IdP WG.
  • AI: Keith et al. will rev the charter for the IdP of Last Resort WG (or whatever the title turns out to be) and send a note to mailing list.

...