Summary

The work of the OSIdM4HE Initiative continues, including technical analysis, organization and planning, and outreach.  New participants have joined the discussion.  The group is working hard to "make it real" by developing concrete proposals targeted at organizational decision makers that can lead to significant resource commitments early in 2012.

General

• The OSIdM4HE joint effort proposal was presented to the Kuali community at Kuali Days 2011 and was well attended and received.  Several additional institutions expressed interest in contributing.  To see notes of the meeting including responses to the IdM survey conducted in advance of the meeting refer to the following links.  Kuali Days IdM BoF Presentation and Notes from Kuali Days IdM BoF 
  • While there was much interest in contributing to focused efforts, many mentioned they would need more of a concrete plan that they could "sell" to the appropriate decision makers at their institution in order to be able to participate in a material fashion.  Work to create this plan is underway.
• The Initiative was discussed at the Kuali Rice Board meeting at Kuali Days and the board continues to express strong interest.  They endorsed a recommendation to speed up our overall initiative by exploring potential consulting services to create an overall development plan with enough details so that interested parties can have confidence in formally contributing resources.  The OSIdM4HE Strategy and Organization team is working to solicit consulting proposals and will present back to the Rice Board for consideration of seed funding.
• Initiative participants will gather at a face-to-face meeting in early January 2012 to move forward on the elements needed for the development plan, including resource and scheduling estimates. We expect to have a public report from this event available by the end of January.
• UCB/UCSF engagement: The UC schools are doing joint work on IAM requirements to meet near-term needs. They are intending to align this work, and potentially resources in 2012, with the needs and goals of OSIdM4HE.
• Participation is expanding to include people from Rutgers University, the University of Arizona, and the OpenRegistry project.
• There has been considerable ongoing discussion about the tension between creating an "ecosystem" of components that can interoperate in an IAM environment (with potentially more than one product/project per functional area), and creating an easy-to-deploy integrated full-function product suite. The conclusion (so far) is that ultimately both will need to happen for the Initiative to succeed.
• We're still looking for a better name ...

Subteams:

Strategy and Organization

• Refined Team Charge
• Proposed new deliverable of Development Investment Plan, likely using consultant help.  See Statement of Work Template.
• Continued work on other top-level documents:  Reference Architecture, Scope and Principles, Naming.

Registries

• Focus on identity matching component as a first development target; likely opportunity via UC interest; could be good pilot for workstream joint development, governance.
• Participation from Rutgers / OpenRegistry, Arizona
• Beginning of analysis and gap-fit of Penn State Central Person Registry against UCB/UCSF registry requirements
• Discussion of and general agreement on API format standards using RESTful methods

Provisioning

• Looking at provisioning methods as applicable to both the path from Systems of Record (eg HR) to Registries and from Registries to downstream systems.
• Looking at provisioning as an aspect of general-purpose enterprise data integration, and existing software packages/patterns that do this (eg Apache ServiceMix).

Access Management

• Gap analysis performed against requirements from Kuali community and Penn State. Both KIM and Grouper were found to match up well.
• Emphasized importance of coordination on capabilities and APIs for (at least) the two useful systems.
• Access request/approval workflow discussed as potential new functional area for AM.