Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.


  • Mary Catherine Martinez, InnoSoft (chair)
  • Brett Bieber, University of Nebraska 
  • David Bantz, University of Alaska  (vice chair)
  • Rachana Ananthakrishnan, Globus, University of Chicago   
  • Tom Barton, University Chicago and Internet2 
  • Eric Goodman, UCOP - TAC Representative to CTAB  
  • Jon Miner, University of Wisc - Madison 
  • Chris Whalen, Research Data and Communication Technologies 
  •  Ann West, Internet2
  • Albert Wu, Internet2 
  • Emily Eisbruch, Internet2  



  • John Pfeifer, University of Maryland  
  • Chris Hable, University of Michigan
  • John Hover, Brookhaven National Lab 
  • Adam Lewenberg , Stanford  
  • Brad Christ, Eastern Washington University


Phase 2 of Baseline

  • Plan is to send cover email and survey to InCommon participants list
    • Suggestion to also send to REFEDs list
  • Survey Considerations
    • The group discussed the issues around whether CTAB guides and leads or responds to the community
    • It can happen that groups  sending out surveys are not prepared to handle the input they receive
    • The survey may provide some useful new ideas
    • The consensus process will allow us to formulate next steps
    • We have identified next steps for Baseline. Some may incur significant cost to meet that baseline. It is useful to ask participants, "What do you think will add the most trust in the federation as consumer and provider"
    • Concern that asking how important an item is seems like a vote. 
    • Suggestion to ask  “how effective is this specific measure to the overall goals”
    • CTAB  should take ownership on the goals/possibilities that we include in the survey
    • Last paragraph of email indicates that CTAB will consider input and present a draft
    • Suggestion to make it clear that all the items are likely coming, CTAB wants community input on when and timing
  • Research Engagement with Survey
    • How to get input from researchers and those who engage with researchers?
    • There are about 70 researchers and within CILogon which includes about 70. Globus fans out to about 1000.
    • Challenging to represent the researchers in such a survey, since they may not be responding to a survey that goes to InCommon Participants.
    • IDP Operators will respond to this survey and they may have different biases than researchers
    • May be useful to ask demographic questions beyond SP / IDP and Org
    • For research orgs, there is tech infrastructure operator, there is also PI and researchers
    • Perhaps add job title
    • There are representatives of research on CTAB
    • We have the benefit of the work done through FIM4R on what the level of trust should be
  • How to best engage with the developer community? Shib, Setosa, SIMPL SAML PhP, redhat
  • MC will add a comments field to each item on the survey

  • Next Steps
    • MC will
      • do additional editing of the survey after the call (done)
      • email CTAB asking for last comments (done)
      •  send to InCommon participants list  (done)
    • Also may want to send to InCommon admins and execs?
    • Suggest a blog post to publicize the survey


Next CTAB call: Wed. July 17, 2019