...
| Number | Current Text | Proposed Text / Query / Suggestion | Proposer | +1 (add your name here if you agree with the proposal) | Action (please leave this column blank) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rebrand R&S | "Rebrand InCommon's R&S efforts" to avoid giving the impression to the rest of the eduGAIN community that the recommendation is to change the name of the entity categroy. | Scott Koranda | +1 please don't open that rathole again! | Recommendation accepted. |
| 2 | "less secure alternatives to federation" | Page 5. "less secure and more privacy-invasive alternatives". It's ironic that SPs and IdPs that create incentives to use them "because privacy" are actually driving users to share more personal data! | Andrew Cormack | Recommendation accepted. | |
| 3 | "practical examples" | Page 7. You may cover this later, and it may not apply to InCommon members but I suspect a lot of IdPs would be greatly helped by providing detailed instructions on how to configure their software to support R&S... | Andrew Cormack | This issue is addressed in our recommendation to "Improve R&S related documentation..." | |
| 4 | "bigger tent" | Page 10-11. Can you use the existing R&S SPs as a channel, to explain to researchers how they could make their, and their institutions', lives easier? We've been trying to close the loop between researchers' needs and central IT provision for a long time  | Andrew Cormack | While we're happy to encourage SP operators to spread the word about the value of R&S, we don't want to create an obligation for them to do the work of the federation. | |
| 5 | "4.3.3 Make R&S attribute release the default policy for InCommon" | I'm confused about "default" versus "requirement" in this section. If the proposal is to make R&S support a requirement to Baseline Expectations, so all InCommon IdPs are required to support R&S, I think it could be stated more directly, and in my opinion, it should be the #1 recommendation, not the last one, since it's a big ask and buried on page 14 it's easy to miss. | Jim Basney | +1 - Gettes. | Recommendation Accepted. We have revised the report's recommendation to make it clear that we think R&S should be included in baseline expectations. |
| 6 | 4.3.3 | I agree with Mr. Basney. As I said at the Global Summit meeting, we should be making this a requirement for InCommon IdPs. And, as Jim notes, it should be the #1 recommendation. While InCommon would be supporting R&S from the REFEDs perspective, the notion of R&S within InCommon should be rendered moot by requiring every IdP to support it. No need to rebrand R&S, it just becomes moot for InCommon. InCommon has been dancing around this issue for far too long and it is time to make this a simple requirement. Yes, I should have done a +1 to Jim's entry, but I want to strongly support this perspective. I am also adding a +1 to Jim's comment. | Michael Gettes | See answer above to #5. | |
See Also