OSIdM4HE-Strategy&Org. call, 5pm - 6pm (ET) Friday, 9/2/2011

Participants

Who

With

Present

Tom Barton

U Chicago

√

Dedra Chamberlin

Berkeley & UCSF

√

Jacob Farmer

Indiana U

 

Keith Hazelton

UW-Madison / Internet2

√

RL "Bob" Morgan

U Dub / Internet2

√

Benn Oshrin

Internet2 / Various

√

Hampton Sublett

UC Davis

√

Bill Yock

U Dub/Rice Board

√

 
 
AGENDA

1. Convene

2. Agenda Bash

3. AI review

  • [OSIdM4HEteam:RL-Bob: Done] Documenting the gaps that have no team (yet). AuthN is one example + Std interleaving services, UI, etc..
  • [OSIdM4HEteam:Benn] send out meeting agenda etc. and suggestion for a subset F2F.

4. Assume Bill Yock brings a version of his "New Model" document to the Rice Board. That will leave quite a bit for the rest of us to do to make OSIdM4HE a healthy, well-coordinated, viable and properly supported initiative.  What's our plan for that?

BillY: Joint MOU doc discussed by Benn, Bill, Hampton;

DedraC: What kind of loose governing structure? Scenario: the provisioning gap; one campus has resources to invest; it would engage with an existing org & develop an MOU, The MOU gets vetted by overall steering committee & blessed in alignment with pledge of allegiance.

HamptonS: Investing school is an equal share in commitment in resources and in governance.  Each MOU structured in way the partners see fit.

DedraC: If I have a need & developers. but the way we propose to do it is not strictly aligned to the pledge...then what?

Clear scope for the steering committee about what is and what isn't in their purview to review

TomB: The template is oriented to "let's build this thing," what about support??  Are we in fact backing into a new organization to support the results?

BennO: The non-profit caretaker entities are where one would look to support.

That would be part of the ask.

RL: I'm on the far side of devil's hat: CIO "this sounds modular, ad hoc, but gosh this is supposed to be leading to a coherent suite that I can deploy in production. Why not just make this a Kuali project?"

[ KeithH thought: a midwife organization that exists for the period of time needed to achieve the deliverables.?]

TomB: granularity of MOUs...

Sometimes may be spinning up a new I2 project; provisioning, e.g., MACE-WG; registry is Kuali...

What makes this work concrete?

BennO: chunks map to gaps.  Order of a dozen MOUs

TomB: take provisioning: a MACE WG, an MOU that gives confidence to parties that it will pay off. What obligation would Kuali have to respect that as THE chunk to fill the gap.

BillY: If Kuali needs provisioning, and an effort spins up in MACE WG, then Kuali would commit resources.

Dedra: Ref Arch that we're driving toward; Benn: that will have to come out of governance layer. Ref Arch WILL have to evolve as tech changes.

BillY: Action item to document all this.  work in notes from today and circulate with larger group.

DedraC: 

8. Review New Action Items

  • No labels